Divide No More

Letter no. 2

While the federal government continues to lie about the medical situation, and to promise new waves of covid in justification of new measures of oppression; while the Ottawa police department decides to back that oppression with every measure it can think of, including attempts to expropriate citizen money donated to the brave men of the Freedom Convoy and to cut off its supply lines by shutting shops and seizing fuel; while ordinary citizens pray for the success of the convoy's cause and the world watches and, inspired, emulates—while all this is happening, what are the bishops doing? 

Are they speaking up in support? Are they issuing warnings and condemnations? Or are they standing idly by, as if it were just too distasteful, as if they'd never heard of the Solidarity movement that helped bring down tyrannical socialism once before? Are they so blind as to be unable to see that we are in the very same struggle for democracy and freedom, and that it is as much a spiritual struggle as a political one? "We are supposed to protest evil," says the priest in the homily linked above, "and this is evil."

In Quebec, as in too many other places, they appear to be that blind. Beginning anew today, they are even acting as agents of the government's violation of constitutional freedoms in their own churches and against the most sacred teachings of their own religion. Like the truckers, to whom I offered a tribute two weeks ago and whom I support today, I do not want or advocate violence. I especially do not want it in the church. But church leaders, and many laity as well, have been complicit in violence—in the "anarchy from above" to which some of us have tried in vain to draw their attention.

Resistance in the churches, like resistance in Ottawa, must be peaceable. It must be an exercise of faith and reason. But it must, as in the political sphere, be firm and unwavering. I am sharing the following letter publicly—I indicated its public nature when I sent it out yesterday—for the sake of those  who want to consider with their own pastors what a refusal of complicity, or repentance from complicity, might look like.

It is a letter, not an essay. It is first and foremost for those to whom it was sent, people I know but have not named, and for Catholics in our own diocese, a majority of whom do not agree with me. Having heard promptly from others to whom I showed it, however, people of relevant expertise in other countries, that it might with some adjustment have broader application, I have decided to share it.

---

6 February 2022

Dear Archbishop, Episcopal Vicar, Pastor, Wardens, and Parish Council:

It is with great sorrow that I learn that it is the intention of our diocese and our parish to conform to the government's passport scheme. This scheme, especially as applied to places of worship, is almost certainly unconstitutional and unable to stand scrutiny in the courts. Moreover, separating the vaccinated from the unvaccinated has no remaining medical justification whatsoever and is being abandoned in many jurisdictions where it was attempted. Far more importantly, the Quebec scheme attempts to make the Church divide itself, which is an assault on our Lord Jesus Christ and a sin against the Holy Spirit. I say this in all theological soberness.

I understand that church authorities, both diocesan and parochial, are hesitant to disobey government decrees, even those of which they are uncertain. I understand that clergy are hesitant to disobey diocesan instructions, for fear of violating their vows or of incurring unwelcome consequences. Those instincts may be sound. It must be observed, however, that it is Catholic teaching that both clergy and laity have a moral obligation to disobey laws and instructions that contradict divine law, natural law, or canon law.

The government has decreed that certain people—those not able or willing to prove that they have been injected with certain substances—must not enter certain buildings, particularly houses of worship. It is my considered view, as a moral theologian well informed in the relevant areas, that the churches should defy this decree. That is not your view collectively, however, and I will not here press mine. I will only point out one thing which you may have overlooked but which must not be overlooked.

The government has decreed, yes; but the government has not deputized and cannot deputize any particular clergyman or layperson to effect its decree. When the priest turns his parishioners away, or requests or permits others who are not government agents to turn them away, he does what the government wants him to do but cannot compel him to do. He also sins against the Lord and causes others to sin.

If there is no will—a will that is growing among many—to confront the government for its attacks on faith and reason or on fundamental law and liberty, if there is no courage to challenge its decree directly, should there not at the very least be sufficient will and courage to tell the government that it must enforce its own decree out of its own resources? To insist that no Catholic will be permitted, on behalf of his church, to do that for the government?

I make, then, a simple proposal: Inform the faithful that the government is continuing to forbid those who either have not obtained a passport or who will not show a passport to enter a church. Tell them that they must reach their own conscientious decision about this in the light of Catholic teaching. Tell them, if you must, that you are not encouraging civil disobedience at this time. Invite them to remain outside in the cold. Promise them that you will come to them with sacramental ministries and blessings.  But do not permit Catholics to stand at the door demanding from their brethren, or from anyone seeking the Lord, proof of anything. Do not take up the government's work of dividing the family of God by setting some members against others.

If you take the path I am recommending, I myself will continue to stand outside in the cold, as a sign of humility in the church and a sign of contradiction in the world. But for the sake of Christ and the body of Christ, I urge you, do not do the government's work of division. I personally will have no part in it, or share in any arrangement that supports it.

In our Lord Jesus, to whom we must render an account for the treasure entrusted to us,

yours faithfully,

Douglas Farrow

PS: As some will know, and others may wish to know, I have explained the concerns behind this letter and proposal in the article Opening Time or Closing Time?