Satan does not haunt us with his ugliness. He does not smell of brimstone but of cologne, a charming figure who would later tempt Jesus in the wilderness with excruciating courtesy, one gentleman meeting another. We find him in the most polite places for the same reason. He is a neatly manicured mal vivant offering choice fare in exquisite taste to those who will have them... consistently smiling, polite, gallant, mannered and sincere.
- Fr. George Rutler, The Impatience of Job
In a post last month I criticized an article in the Catholic Register covering the appointment of Sr. Simone Roach to the Order of Canada. That article, written by Michael Swan, failed to mention that Canada's most famous abortionist, Henry Morgentaler, was also recently appointed and that, in protest and by adhering to principle, some Catholics thereafter returned the award. It is a significant controversy that should have been factored in the article, once again evidencing skewed reporting at this reportedly Catholic periodical.
Well, now the editorial board have come out in defence of Sr. Roach, who is accepting the appointment, in a piece issued on August 11. So get out your handkerchiefs out, get ready to cry a river, and let the appeal to emotionalism begin... [TH2 analysis in bolded square brackets]
...and so another whitewashing job by the Catholic Register is completed.Honour Sr. RoachThe Church has received little good news of late so we should take a moment to celebrate last month’s announcement that Sr. Simone Roach has been named to the Order of Canada. [The "little good news of late" phrase is a hollow justification for the whitewash that follows. The Church has been receiving bad news for quite some time. Remember: this editorial is a reaction and never would have been issued had Catholics not spoken out.]Admittedly, this editorial is a few weeks late and might not have come at all but for some second guessing being directed towards Sr. Roach. ["Second guessing"? Who second guessed? Nobody did. Arguments were straightforwardly put forward stating that a Catholic nun should reject such an appointment]. There is a school of thought that holds that Sr. Roach - and, for that matter, all Catholics - should refuse the Order of Canada because two years ago it was given to abortionist Henry Morgentaler. Not to diminish the shame of that decision, but it seems unfair to tar Sr. Roach with Morgentaler’s brush.[Tarring a person has nothing to do with the situation. Neither is criticism issued to diminish the accomplishments of Sr. Roach. These are extraneous to the situation. Rather, the matter directly relates to principle: Should a Catholic (let alone a nun) accept an award from a body (with an implicit moral relativism) that also sees no problem with offering the same prize to a man responsible for countless murders of children in the womb?]No doubt, bestowing the Order of Canada on someone convicted of performing illegal abortions was shameful then and remains a blight on Canada’s highest honour now.[Do ya think? I would use the word abomination rather than "shameful".] Largely because of Morgentaler, Canada currently has no abortion laws and our abortion rates are among the highest in the Western world.[Which betrays the editors at CR to be even more untrustworthy and apathetic for "honouring" Sr. Roach's decision.] Honouring him [i.e. Moloch] was a travesty but should Sr. Roach have to pay for it? [Diversion. "Paying for it" has nothing to do with this issue. It is adherence to principle. It is not a recompense. It is not quid pro quo.]The retired chair of nursing at St. Francis Xavier University has been named to the Order for a lifetime of achievement in nursing, particularly her role in creating Canada’s first code of ethics for nurses. [A wonderful achievement. God bless her. But this, again, is a diversion on the part of the CR editorial staff. They don't want readers to face the cold, harsh reality of the controversy.]But academic accomplishments are hardly a full measure of her contribution. She practices her profession and lives her life by the belief that, in her words, caring is the human mode of being. “I care not because I am a nurse, but because I am a human being,” she says. [Children in the womb are human beings too. This is not a priority of a Catholic nurse who works for health/life?]Caring for each other is the essence of our humanity. As incarnate Christ embraced the sick, the lame, the blind and the poor, that example of compassionate humanity has guided Sr. Roach. It should be an example to us all. [Notice: a sentimentalistic humanism is injected into the arena. Yes, Christ "embraced the sick, the lame, the blind and the poor", i.e. those who are vulnerable. Are not children in the womb vulnerable as well? Again, see how the CR editors are diverting by appealing to emotions with that "social justice" twist.]The Church needs to be present in the world and actively contributing to the common good. [The Church can do this without grovelling before, and befriending, the spirit of the world. It always has and always will.] Now more than ever, the world needs to see that there are thousands of priests and religious leading selfless lives of faith and charity to bring benefit to others. These heroic men and women are the true face of the Church. [Would Mother Teresa of Calcutta, a heroic model of a holy, selfless nun, accept this appointment?] When Sr. Roach receives her Order of Canada she will, in some sense, be standing for them all. [No she will not. In "some sense"? What sense would that be? Why cannot the editors at CR be more specific?]Would she make a stronger statement by not being there? [Yes, she would.] At least eight previous Order of Canada recipients listened to their conscience and returned their medals.[So does this mean that Sr. Roach is not listening to her conscience? See the illogic.] For them, that decision was proper. [Notice: "for them", as if the principle is a function of the self, of what one thinks or feels, which is another incarnation of Kantianism, not at all rooted in the Catholic metaphysic.] But that does not mean a sincere examination of conscience by someone else must yield the same conclusion. [Ah, yes, the moral autonomy of the self. Do I hear the "Dictatorship of Relativism"? HHB16 was right on the money.]Sr. Roach has obviously decided to accept her Order of Canada. [With the encouragement of the Catholic Register, the evidence shows.] We must assume the decision was not taken lightly. She has a lifetime of professional achievement and faithful service to prove her worthiness. Some people may disagree with her choice but as Christians we should respect it. [Do not condescend us by telling what and what not to "respect". "We know better than you", the CR staff effectively says.]
What is interesting is that the editorial has a photograph of Sr. Roach whereof she appears forlorn, somewhat sad, as if we are to feel pity for her. Is not the appointment supposed to be a happy occasion? Since the photo credit is Mr. Swan's (the writer of the first article in July), one wonders if this embedded image is stage play, so as to make the reader feel sorry for her and thus justify her decision. Nonetheless, Sr. Roach, like so many female religious of her generation - habitless and focussed on the horizontal, the hollow humanistic - has succumbed to one of Satan's desert temptations. A Bride of Christ, once directed to the vertical in the distant past, now desires the honour of the world over and above the infinite honour and immeasurable love offered by her Holy Spouse. That the editorial staff at the Catholic Register facilitates this tragedy, this effective honouring of Moloch, once again demonstrates the subtle, slow-motion apostasy therein.