| Home >> Directory of sheep and wolves

Letters sent to the Quebec Chronicle-Telegraph

Quebec Chronicle-Telegraph
www.qctonline.com

Table of contents

1) Introduction
2) Cardinal Ouellet vs. The Pro-Abortion Media (2010-May-18)
3) Politically Incorrect Support For Canadian Troops In Afghanistan (2010-May-18)
4) A Tale Of Upper And Lower Cases: Church or church, Opinion or opinion? (2010-May-18)

1) Introduction

This isn't really "Correspondence", but a catch-all for little e-mails I send to the local English newspaper. They repeat what is on my web site, so there is no reason to translate them into French, or to invest the time to transform each and every one of them into a standalone article.

2) Cardinal Ouellet vs. The Pro-Abortion Media (2010-May-18)

Published: May 19, 2010

Cardinal Ouellet vs. The Pro-Abortion Media

Some journalists have attacked Cardinal Marc Ouellet
for his anti-abortion speeches at two recent events
(the National March for Life in Ottawa, and the conference
in Quebec City organized by Campagne Québec-Vie).

Let's set aside the whole issue of abortion, to simplify
this discussion. Indeed, before we start a debate
on abortion, we first need to agree on
something more fundamental: authenticity. In other words,
you cannot have a good debate with someone who speaks
out of both sides of his mouth. Whatever your
position on abortion, you at least need to take that
position truthfully and without hypocrisy.

What is the connection between authenticity and Cardinal
Ouellet? Simple: The pro-life position is not Ouellet's
position, it is the Catholic Church's position. Ouellet
is one of the rare Bishops in the Province of Quebec who
is openly supporting the Church's pro-life position.

This leads to one inescapable logical conclusion: pro-
abortion journalists are not giving credit where credit is
due. These journalists should congratulate Cardinal
Ouellet for being honest, and they should attack just about
every other Bishop in this Province for being hypocritical.
After, and only after, should they attack the pro-life
position.

But pro-abortion journalists are not only illogical in
their attacks. They also flee honest and constructive
debates. I know. I've been inviting them for years.

Stefan Jetchick
www.proviequebec.ca

3) Politically Incorrect Support For Canadian Troops In Afghanistan (2010-May-18)

Politically Incorrect Support For Canadian Troops In Afghanistan

If Islam really was "The Religion Of Peace (TM)", as the left-wing
Media wants us to believe, then it would be easy to support
our Canadian troops in Afghanistan, while remaining politically
correct. I would just need to congratulate our troops for
fighting against those nasty "Misunderstanders Of Islam (TM)".

Except the facts don't support this vision of Islam. Just
listen to what the jihadists themselves have to say! They
don't make up the Koran quotes they use to justify their
actions.

The Western World is not at war with a few "Misunderstanders
Of Islam (TM)", and jihad cannot be fully explained by the
usual left-wing incantations (lack of Government-subsidized
housing, poor employment opportunites, constant American
"aggressions", etc.). Something far darker and evil is at work
here.

The reason you can even read this politically incorrect letter
is that previous Canadian troops have shed their blood to
defend freedom of speech (and since we are being politically
incorrect anyway) and all those things that came with the
British Empire. But if this generation of Canadian soldiers
doesn't stop the darkness and evil lurking around the globe,
then, "Sharia will be the Charter, the Charter of this Land /
and Canadians really, really will be slaves".

Stefan Jetchick

4) A Tale Of Upper And Lower Cases: Church or church, Opinion or opinion? (2010-May-18)

Published: May 26, 2010

[Here is the original Letter Pierre wants me to debunk]

Dear Editor,

«I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth.... I
believe in the holy catholic Church.»  So says the Creed.

The point is, however, – sorry  to again belabour the capitals and non – the
universal Church is, in fact, catholic and not Catholic per se. I am a part of
that universal, as is any Christian believer who has claimed the sacrifice of
Christ as efficient and sufficient for him or her. I have scads of friends who
go by the denominational designation of Catholic, others Presbyterian,
Pentecostal, Anglican, even the odd Baptist. Some of these friends, maybe all
of them, are Christians. Some are, quite possibly, just Catholics,
Presbyterians, Pentecostals, and so forth.

You wear a label, you wear a label, no problem: just be aware that it is a
label. You will not be required to produce it at heaven's gate. In fact avoid
playing that card altogether once you get to that point.

One could argue into next week as to whom or what Christ was referring to in
his affirmation in Matthew 16:18. Was the rock Peter, his disciple; was it
Jesus himself – it might have been interesting to see his body language during
this dialogue; – was it the confession Peter had just made, one undeniable
foundation of all Christian truth? As a matter of fact, it may well have been
this weak and fickle human being whom God, at Pentecost, would infuse with
supernatural grace for ministry.

However, to wander from this possible interpretation of Scripture to the
appointment of Peter as the first pope, turning the catholic (universal) and
apostolic Church into the supposedly all-powerful and all-encompassing Roman
Catholic Church of the ninth or tenth centuries, outside of which there is no
salvation, that will require fast talking and a feat of prestidigitation that
has not yet been found to satisfy or convince most non-Catholics. Whoever or
whatever the rock may be, the Church is not that church (alone).

That the Roman Catholic Church is rich is undeniable. That her faithful members
have done much good in the world with that wealth is remarkable and
praiseworthy. Every cup of cold water given in His name will not escape His
notice. But no denominational name can ever possess or provide an exclusive
right of passage through the valley of the shadow and into the presence of God.
There was a cross for that... and only a cross.



A Tale Of Upper And Lower Cases

Last week, a Letter to the Editor made a fuss over uppercase
"Church" and lowercase "church". Basically, the author disagrees
with the Catholic Church's claim to be the only Church founded
by Jesus Christ (who is true Man and true God).

I only have two comments. First comment: Just as you can't
play a hockey game in a phone booth, I can't solve this
problem in a tiny newspaper article. My preferred approach
is through a respectful and constructive e-mail debate,
posted on the Internet for all to see. If you're interested,
just google my name. (Newspapers normally censor the name
of my personal web site.)

Second comment: If you want to play games with uppercase
and lowercase, don't forget it goes both ways. Your opinion
might not be Opinion. If you claim that: "no denominational name
can ever possess or provide an exclusive right of passage
through the valley of the shadow and into the presence of God",
that is just your lowercase opinion. Moreover, it is a
demonstrably false opinion. Indeed, if Almighty and
All-Knowing God decides that He will have One and only One
Church, then He can do it.

Did God really found One and Only One Church, and if so,
is that Church the Roman Catholic Church? See my first
comment. But don't try to handcuff God's power with your
lowercase opinions.

Stefan Jetchick
www.inquisition.ca

| Home >> Directory of sheep and wolves