Even though Catholic Social Teaching encourages the wide distribution of property, in Vancouver it seems there’s little we can do to help younger people achieve affordable home ownership. 

Until Oct. 18, however, there is something each of us can do, even if we don’t live in Delta. We can each fill out a survey about housing needs at delta.ca/your-government/delta's-projects/housing-action-plan.

One way to help provide affordable home ownership is to let owners of old houses on big lots replace them with four smaller houses with no strata fees. Delta gave our family permission to do this in 2016, and we just finished this “pilot project.”

We hope many more families will build projects like ours. Replacing big houses with several smaller homes helps older people downsize, remain in their own neighbourhood, share their land with their young adult children, and avoid strata fees and strata councils.

The smaller houses we built have helped three of our young adult children become homeowners without strata fees and have also allowed my 89-year-old mother to live in front of us, while keeping her independence. 

I urge everyone reading this to fill out the survey, whether you are young, old, or middle aged. Even if you don’t live in Delta, if you would consider moving there if smaller homes on smaller lots were allowed, Delta wants to hear from you.

Above is a picture of the four little houses we just built. Many of us who were born more than 60 years ago have more land and more house than we need, so it makes sense for us to share it with the younger generations.

Kathleen Higgins
Delta


Re “Abortion and condoms and sex, oh my!” (B.C. Catholic, Sept. 2):

In his interesting and timely article, Joshua Palmarin brings to our attention what must be the most confusing and controversial teaching of the Catholic Church – the prohibition of artificial contraception stemming from the 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae of Pope Paul VI.

To add to the confusion, the Winnipeg Statement was published two months later by the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, which sought to address widespread concern within the Church about the ban and to counsel its members on how to respond to those who have difficulty accepting those directives. It is most controversial as it has been interpreted as a loophole whereby Catholics may feel permitted to use artificial birth control methods. Central to the debate is the role and importance of personal religious freedom of conscience.

What the Winnipeg document failed to address was the turbulent time of the 1960s and 1970s – the age of Free Love. No one can deny the sweeping decline in morality, the lowering of moral standards especially among the young who are constantly exposed to temptation, infidelity, children born out of wedlock, the vast increase in divorce, the soaring numbers of absent fathers, and children living in households where one or both parties are not their biological parents.

Free Love is associated with promiscuity that has destroyed careers, families, and homes. It raises serious concerns that when a man is accustomed to using contraceptives, he ignores the respect due to a woman and reduces her to a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires. It paints a very clear picture of what happens when Catholic teaching is ignored.


Pope Paul VI knew that to do nothing was not an option. Incentives were needed to keep the moral law and order. He realized that to turn a blind eye, thus making it easy for people to break the law, was just as evil. In his wisdom and guided by the Holy Spirit, he wrote Humanae Vitae. It is a document about real love, about the home that should be a place of love and stability.

We will do well to remember what G.K. Chesterton said when he wrote, “What is quaintly called “birth control” is in fact a scheme to prevent birth in order to escape control.”

Leslie Michael
Maple Ridge


Thanks to Graham Osborne for his recent articles on the reception of Communion (B.C. Catholic, July 29, Sept. 9). He has given us a clear picture of the historical, theological, and traditional aspects of this practice.

In the end, it depends on each individual. As he concludes in his latest article, it is important for every Catholic to consider these things and make the best decision. In order to do that, I hope all Catholics read both his articles on the subject.

However, I would like to refer also to the letter from Samuel Stagliano in the Sept. 2 issue. I agree with him that while poor catechesis plays a part in the fact that two-thirds of Catholics do not believe in the Real Presence, many clergy too do not act as though the Eucharist is the Body of Christ.

There should be more reverence all round. For a start, having altar rails and kneeling to receive Communion should be the norm. Priests should not be in a hurry to get it over and done with, and the laity should receive and consume Jesus, especially if you are receiving in the hand, before you leave the altar rail. That would prevent the danger of any particles being dropped.

Priests are blessed with such an exceptional privilege and act in the person of Christ, so they should set an example by showing extra reverence in handling the Eucharist and distributing Communion. In that way, they could expect or even demand greater reverence from the laity.

Doris Joseph
Vancouver


Re “Caring for the environment is a moral obligation,” B.C. Catholic, Sept. 16:

I will no longer be shocked by the methods global warming extremists use to convey their message, and I might suggest that Mark Norbury’s use of the Church to convey his global warming beliefs and untruths could also be sinful.

No one disputes the obligation of caring for the environment, but global warming caused by fossil fuels is not a proven science. I would also caution that reading the instructions in the Catechism of the Catholic Church ”…we are bound to adhere to the truth once we come to know it,” and urge everyone to consider the difference between “believe it” and “know it.”

Bert Podruzny
South Surrey