Pourquoi suis-je critique envers le pape François?

Pope Francis

Cher frères et sœurs dans le Christ,

J’aimerais commencer par mentionner qu’évidemment comme catholique, j’ai un profond respect et amour pour l’office du Pape.

Le pape est responsable, par le biais de son office pétrine, de confirmer les fidèles dans l’enseignement de la foi et de la moralité (Ce que nous croyons, et comment nous devons agir). Les doctrines et les dogmes de l’Église sont basés dans la loi naturelle et la révélation divine et donc sont immuables. (Comme Dieu est immuable) Ces dogmes et doctrines représentent la fondation de notre foi, notre liturgie et la mission d’évangélisation de l’Église.

Permettez-moi une analogie.

Le père est le leader de sa famille. Il a comme responsabilité la providence matérielle de sa famille mais plus important encore, la providence spirituelle de sa famille. Un père qui remplit bien cette fonction apporte la paix, la joie, la sainteté à son épouse et ses enfants. Par contre, le père qui ne se soucie pas de ses fonctions suscite l’effet contraire sur sa famille. Il apporte un stress sur son épouse, ses enfants et la fidélité à la foi est très difficile dans un tel environnement.

https://www.romancatholicman.com/dad-takes-faith-god-seriously-will-children/

Tel est de même pour notre père spirituel dans l’Église: le pape. Un pape droit, orthodoxe et saint apportera ses enfants (nous) vers la sainteté. Par contre, le contraire peut aussi se manifester.

Que ce passerais-t-il si cette situation était réalité? Revenons-donc à notre analogie.

Si un père se permet soudainement d’enseigner des faussetés, deviens alcoolique ou serait victime d’autres problèmes similaires; quel serait la réponse charitable pour la famille face à ce comportement? Ne rien dire?

La réponse de la femme et des enfants de la famille ne serait pas de ne rien dire et d’accepter l’abus mais par amour pour le père, il serait charitable de le corriger et lui faire admonition que son comportement doit changer.

C’est cet amour véritable (Caritas) envers mon père spirituel qui me pousse à discuter des items difficiles et résister certaines positions qui sont communiqués et acceptés au Vatican depuis quelques années.

Certaines personnes diront à ce point-ci qu’en famille, les disputes sont réglés à l’interne et non pas en publique. Pourquoi donc critiquer le pape sur des plateformes publiques? C’est à ce point-ci j’argumenterai, que l’analogie se brise. Le pape, étant une figure publique d’un point de vue mondial, influence d’une façon instantanée le monde entier lorsqu’il enseigne. S’il venait qu’à commettre une erreur, la réponse la plus adéquate pour y remédier serait aussi sur le forum public.

Donc à ce point-ci, examinons certains aspects du pontificat du pape François. Je vous présente, ici, seulement des items majeurs dans les derniers 3 années de son pontificat.

Amoris Laetitia

  • Le 19 septembre 2016, le pape François, après les synodes sur la famille a émis l’exhortation apostolique Amoris Laetitia qui apporte plusieurs confusions comme :
    • 300-305 du document semble donner droit maintenant aux individus de recevoir l’absolution et communion même s’ils sont validement mariés, vivant dans une nouvelle union sans toutefois avoir reçu un annulement pour la première union valide. Ceci contredit Familiaris Consortio n.84, Reconciliatio et Paenitentia n.34, Sacramentum Caritatis n.29
    • 304 semble nier qu’il existe des normes qui interdissent absolument la participation des fidèles à certaines actions intrinsèquement immorales. Ceci contredit Veritatis Splendor n.79
    • (Voir le lien ci-dessous pour la suite)

Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, Raymond Burke, Carlo Caffara et Joachim Meisner ont émis des Dubia (doutes) en Novembre 2016 demandant au Pape François de clarifier cette exhortation apostolique. Ils n’ont à ce jour, pas encore reçu de réponses.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/full-text-of-4-cardinals-letter-to-pope-francis-with-explanatory-notes-and

De plus le 16 juillet 2017, une Correctio Fillialis (correction filiale) a été envoyée au Pape demandant aussi des clarifications sur Amoris Laetitia et autres déclarations problématiques. Ils ont eux aussi, pas reçu de réponses. (Cette Correctio Filialis n’est pas la seule en son genre)

http://www.correctiofilialis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Correctio-filialis_English_1.pdf

L’affaire McCarrick et Archevêque Viganò

Ceci est une affaire très complexe qui a déjà été médiatisée donc je ne ferais pas un détail complet. Pour résumer, l’ancien Cardinal McCarrick a été trouvé coupable, au cours de l’été 2018, d’agression sexuelle sur enfants, adolescents et séminaristes.

Lorsque tout ceci est devenu public, Archevêque Viganò a décidé de médiatiser tout l’information qu’il connaissait et détenait à propos du “cover-up” de plusieurs haut-placés dans l’Église (incluant le pape François). Maintenant (+1 ans plus tard), tout ce que Viganò a témoigné c’est avéré véridique et corroboré par d’autres sources. Ceci veut dire que, plus probable qu’autrement, Pape François était complice dans la réhabilitation du Cardinal McCarrick (un prédateur sexuel connu) après avoir été sanctionné par Benoit XVI quelques années auparavant.

http://online.wsj.com/media/Viganos-letter.pdf

Déclaration d’Abu Dhabi

Dans cette déclaration écrite en conjonction avec un grand Imam Égyptien (musulmans), il est écrit que Dieu a voulu, par sa volonté divine, la diversité des religions. Ceci est une grave erreur qui est à l’encontre du premier commandement du décalogue ainsi qu’à l’encontre plusieurs conciles, du catéchisme etc…

Bien qu’il a essayé par la suite d’expliquer qu’il voulait dire la volonté permissive de Dieu, le texte dans son entier ne démontre pas cette distinction et aucune correction n’a été faite au texte par la suite. Au contraire, le Vatican a ordonné que ce document soit reproduit et distribué dans tous les universités pontificales dans son état actuel.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/bp.-schneider-pope-must-formally-correct-statement-that-god-wills-false-religions

Renversement de la peine de Mort

La nouvelle révision du paragraphe 2267 du catéchisme approuvé par le pape le 2 août 2018 dicte que la peine de mort est maintenant inadmissible dans tous les cas. Ce qui va à l’encontre de la loi naturelle et de l’enseignement de l’Église depuis 2000 ans. Ceci est un exemple officiel d’un changement de doctrine. (Comme mentionné auparavant, les doctrines sont immuables)

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/popes-new-teaching-on-death-penalty-appears-in-revised-theological-commentary-on-catechism

Synode Pan-Amazonien

L’Instrumenum Laboris (document de travail) pour ce synode (qui est à venir en Octobre 2019) a été émis au mois de juin 2019. Il inclut des items extrêmement troublants comme le paganisme, panthéisme, théologie écologique, théologie de libération, suggestion d’ordination des femmes à la prêtrise, l’abolition du célibat pour les prêtres de l’amazone avec suggestion d’ordonner comme prêtres les chefs des tribus amazoniennes (ces tribus sont très violentes et païennes). Ce document mentionne la Cosmo-Vision (Est-ce que quelqu’un sait ce que cela veux dire?) et le mantra du Pape François.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/dear-cardinals-and-bishops-do-you-really-want-a-church-like-this

Tous ces problèmes apparents sont encourus dans les derniers 3 ans seulement. Ils ne représentent pas une liste exhaustive. Ils n’incluent pas :

  • L’accord signé entre le Vatican et le gouvernement communiste chinois qui essentiellement permet au gouvernement chinois de choisir les évêques du pays. Cet accord a été négocié par l’ancien Cardinal McCarrick après avoir été réhabilité. (La persécution de l’Église chinoise dans la dernière année a augmenté et est très médiatisée)

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cdl.-zen-vatican-is-helping-chinas-communist-govt.-annihilate-underground-c

  • La célébration au Vatican du 500ième anniversaire de la révolution protestante initié par Martin Luther.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-catholics-now-recognize-martin-luther-as-a-witness-to-the-gospel

  • Le support du Pape Francois pour l’agenda 2030 des Nation-Unis qui inclus un gouvernement mondial, l’avortement disponible à tous, support pour le socialisme, immigration non-réglementée.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIe5CW9LEO4

  • La réception au Vatican (pour des rencontres avec des membres de la Curie) de groupes pro-homosexualité, pro-avortement, tout en refusant catégoriquement de recevoir des gens comme Matteo Salvini (politicien Italien catholique qui a baiser son chapelet pendant sa campagne politique)

https://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/11699/salvini-criticised-for-using-catholic-symbols-at-rally

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/05/world/lgbt-vatican-meeting/index.html

 Conclusion

Bien que je reconnais que le Pape François a un grand amour pour les pauvres et les démunis (et cela est excellent), sa mission primaire comme successeur de Saint-Pierre est de confirmer les fidèles catholiques dans la Foi et la moralité. Sur cet aspect, à mon avis, il n’est pas à la hauteur.

Il est important de résister les erreurs pour garder le dépôt de la foi intacte. Trop de gens, peuvent se retrouver avec l’attitude Papolâtre de dire : “Le pape l’a dit donc c’est vrai”. Nous devons tester les déclarations contre la révélation divine et la Tradition de l’Église, comme nous a enseigné Saint-Paul. (1 Jn 4 :1)

J’imagine que j’ai la semblance d’être négatif car je discute des erreurs et scandales régulièrement sur mes plateformes, mais si je ne le fais pas, qui va le faire? J’aimerais bien plus discuter de sujets joyeux, de la beauté de notre théologie catholique que de devoir discuter de ces choses.

Si j’en ai la capacité, j’ai responsabilité comme enfant de Dieu et membre de l’Église Catholique de dénoncer les erreurs, qui pourrait potentiellement coûter l’âme des gens, même si ces erreurs proviennent du Pape.

Des erreurs commises par des papes n’est pas un phénomène nouveau dans l’Église, comme le démontre le livre de Roberto De Mattei – Love for the Papacy and Filial Resistance to the Pope in the History of the Church.

Plusieurs Saints, Rois, Laïques etc… ont dû, historiquement, démontrer respect envers l’office du Pape, tout en dénonçant les erreurs commises.

https://www.amazon.com/Papacy-Filial-Resistance-History-Church/dp/1621384551

Je prie pour le pape François à chaque jour pendant mon chapelet, qu’il puisse convertir son cœur et protéger le dépôt de la foi comme il se doit de le faire. Rien ne me ferait plus plaisir que le Pape François puisse se repentir des fautes déjà commises et être un Saint-Pape, défenseur des dogmes et doctrines authentiques de l’Église.

Appel à vous

Par contre, me connaissant un homme faillible, je ne propose pas que mon approche et mon discernement est bon ou prudent en toutes occasions. Peut-être y-a-t’ il une façon pour moi de discuter des sujets difficiles, de défendre l’authentique Foi catholique sans toutefois donner l’impression de division ou de confrontation? Si vous avez des suggestions en ce sens, s’il vous plaît faites-moi en part.

In Christo,

André Levesque

Pour un compendium des croyances que nous devons adhérer pour être en communion avec l’Église, voir la Déclaration des Vérités émises en juin 2019 par Cardinal Burke, Monseigneur Schneider et les autres évêques du Kazakhstan.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/images/local/Declaration_Truths_Errors.pdf

What about miracles?

Miracles

Whenever you talk about your faith or even to a broader sense, about God’s existence to an atheist or skeptic, (let’s call him Mike from now on) you might get stonewalled or you might get a great conversation about the deeper things in life. You will probably end up talking about your favorite Netflix show. What you will rarely get is a conversion from Mike.

There are a myriad of solid evidence for belief in God (we won’t get into that in this post) but for there to be conversion, there is an absolute leap of faith needed since some of the truth behind God are greater than what we will ever be able to know, in this existence. What you end up confronted with will be one of four things: an unconvinced Mike, a combative Mike, a pensive Mike or an apathetic Mike.

Faced with such a situation, I often ask Mike what kind of evidence he would need that would convince him that a leap into faith is the right thing for him. He would probably say something like this: “Show me scientific proof that a being such as God exists!” The problem with this is that God, as we know him, creator of the universe CANNOT be in space and time. Do we see the problem with what Mike is asking? The scientific method measures, quantifies, shows us truths about what is situated IN space and time. No discovery from the scientific method could ever provide proof of God, per se.

But what if God reveals himself to us and makes himself known in time and space? Would that convince Mike? I hear all the Christians right now screaming; “God revealed in space and time? Duh! Jesus!” I doubt that Mike believes that the Bible is the inspired word of God. Jesus might have just been a nice guy that lived 2000 years ago right? (Wrong, but let’s move on) What if God revealed himself, though subtly, in a way that is verifiable with the senses and quantifiable by the scientific method? Yes, I’m talking about miracles.

Yes I believe in miracles. From my point of view, it seems that God gives them to us to provide a twofold benefit for our lives. First, they seem to be a way to replenish faith in those who already have it. Also, for those who don’t have faith it provides evidence of supernatural realities.

Let’s show Mike a couple of known miracles.

Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano, Italy  

Around the year 700, a priest-monk of the order of St-Basil was saying mass. He previously had doubts about transubstantiation. (Term used to denote when bread and wine are turned to the body and blood of Christ) Saying the words of consecration, the bread turned into a piece of flesh and the wine into actual blood. The blood quickly turned into five pellets of congealed blood.

Lanciano

This piece of flesh and these pellets of blood are still present today, in Lanciano, Italy and can be visited. Crazy right? But how do we know that these are real?

In 1970 a scientifically thorough study was done by Dr. Odoardo Linoli professor of anatomy, pathological histology, chemistry and clinical microscopy. A stud of the sciences, I might say. The results are astonishing. The flesh was concluded to be a striated muscular tissue of the myocardium (heart wall) and contained no preservation agents. The flesh and blood were deemed to be of human origin, of the same type (AB). The professor also concluded that blood from a cadaver would have decayed centuries prior and only a professional in anatomic dissection could have obtained such a pristine cut of flesh from the heart.

All these findings were put into a detailed report and the minutes of all the meetings are kept by the monastery, to this day.[1]

The incorruptibles

I will not go into details of these miracles, since there are whole books dedicated to this subject (Plus, how do I pick just one to share here?). What I will say is that there are 102 (and growing) saints that have died (well there are actually a lot more than that that have died) But what’s special about these particular saints is that their bodies have not decayed after death. Some of them you can still see today![2]

Do you think Mike would be convinced by miracles such as these? I sure hope he would. At least it makes it harder to outright deny faith.

[1] Eucharistic Miracles, Cruz, Joan Carroll, Tan Books

[2] The Incorruptibles, Cruz, Joan Carroll, Tan Books

Where the church and the world collide

church and the world

Back from my two months summer hiatus, I wanted to tackle a hot button issue. This issue is one that plagues millions today and one that is widely unpopular: Catholic sexual morality.

Fornication, contraception, pornography, homosexuality, divorce and abortion are widely regarded as topics in which the Church errs and rarely ignites polite dialogue between believers and non-believers. There are most certainly discussions to have on any one of these topics, but for today, I’ll explore the seemingly alien concept of chastity.

First off, is there a need for sexual morality? Our human experience seems to indicate that this is the case. Putting aside the obvious evils that are pornography, prostitution, rape and incest, we can evaluate other tenants of what is included in our sexual experiences to conclude that chastity should be examined on a closer level.  For example, “Divorce kills the “one flesh” theology created by marriage. It inevitably destroys the indispensable foundation of the family and creates in children a hard, cynical spirit, insecurity, distrust in persons and a rejection of the idea of self-giving love (not to mention the damages suffered by the adults in said divorces). Furthermore, there are adverse health effects from sexual impropriety: Increased sexually transmitted disease, AIDS, rising infertility rate and death. The human victims in just one generation of abortion vastly outnumber the victims of wars throughout history”.[1]

Looking up from these rather grim consequences we find the reason for the Catholic Church’s teaching on chastity. Chastity is the sum of all sexual virtue and is not the same as abstinence. It is communicated differently based on one’s state of life.

“Some profess virginity or consecrated celibacy which enables them to give themselves to God alone with an undivided heart in a remarkable manner. Others live in the way prescribed for all by the moral law, whether they are married or single.” Married people are called to live conjugal chastity; others practice chastity in continence: There are three forms of the virtue of chastity: the first is that of spouses, the second that of widows and the third that of virgins. We do not praise any one of them to the exclusion of the others. . . . This is what makes for the richness of the discipline of the Church.” (CCC 2349)[2]

There is a beautiful foundation for the teaching on chastity that sexuality is an image of God. “As soon as Scripture mentions “the image of God”, it mentions sexuality: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Gen 1:27). Sexuality is an image of God by being a reflection of the Trinity: as God is one yet three, spouses are two yet one.”[3]

Based on the cathechism’s definition of chastity, it seems so contrary to our instincts. If our instincts are such that chastity is so contrary to them, then either Christianity is wrong in proposing chastity or our sexual instincts, as we now know it, have gone wrong. For this answer, I will differ to C.S Lewis which analyzed this dilemma beautifully in Mere Christianity (94-97). (The following two paragraphs are all paraphrasing from Lewis’ treaty on the subject)

It would seem that our sexual instincts have gone wrong.  Let’s examine why by comparing sex to another natural desire of the body: eating. The biological purpose of sex is children, just as the biological purpose of eating is to repair the body. Someone might over-indulge in food but not disproportionately. Someone might eat for two, but never for ten! The same cannot be said of our sexual appetite. If a healthy man would indulge in every sexual desire he has, he might end up fathering a small village! This appetite is in insane excess of its function.

We seem to be able to assemble a large group of people to watch a strip-tease show, or pornography but we would never see such group if on the stage, or computer was a plate full of bacon! Some critics might say that such tendencies come from starvation, that there is such a desire for sex because of some sort of starvation from this desire in one way or another. Is this reality though? Contraceptives have made sexual indulgence far less costly within marriage and much safer outside of marriage and public opinion of illicit unions are much less taboo. It seems then that the sexual appetite is growing and perverting by indulgence. Starving men may think of food, but so do gluttons.

There is much more to be said on the topic, but from Lewis’ explanation we can deduce that abandoning ourselves to our sexual desires as they are today is unhealthy and eventually leads us to the aforementioned problems. This is the very reason that the Church proposes chastity. It protects us from our disordered desires (pornography, prostitution, fornication) and its consequences (depression, divorce, multiple health concerns) etc. “There are three things we need– holiness, happiness and health– because we live on three levels: spirit soul and body”[4]. God’s laws, including chastity, gives us all three.

[1] Kreeft, Peter, Catholic Christianity (Ignatius Press), 243

[2] Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), 2349

[3] Kreeft, Peter, Catholic Christianity (Ignatius Press), 244

[4] Kreeft, Peter, Catholic Christianity (Ignatius Press), 242

The Genesis Controversy?

genesis

We’ve all indulged in the reading or viewing of such popular franchises as The Lord of the Rings, The Hunger Games, The Pirates of the Caribbean or other similar productions. These franchises are usually very immersive and make us feel at times as being part of their world. We indulge in these as a way to entertain ourselves but none of us would pretend that these fictional worlds are real, would we? I say this tongue in cheek of course but it’s not uncommon to see similar mistakes being made when it comes to the interpretation of the Bible.

Let’s start by asking this question: What is the Bible? According the Catholic Answers encyclopedia it is “a collection of writings which the Church of God has solemnly recognized as inspired. The name is derived from the Greek expression ta biblia, which means (the books)” (emphasis added). St-Jerome would even call it the “Divine Library”. Why is this important? Well, in a library, you would be expected to find all kinds of books from fiction to biographies to scientific manuals.

This is exactly how we need to approach the Bible. We need to be able to identify the nature of the 73 books inside the Bible before reading them because who in their right mind as ever read the works of Shakespeare as scientific text?

Let’s get back to my original thought by taking the book of Genesis as an example. We too often hear critics of the Christian faith abuse this book as being filled with unscientific nonsense and therefore using this to show that the Christian faith must be false or the Bible not inerrant. Some will use the young-earth creationist interpretation of the creation account that the earth was created around 6000 years ago in a 6 day span as being nonsense or Genesis’ text itself that there was light on the first day before the sun was created on the fourth day. (We also use days as an instrument to measure the earth’s rotation on itself, so without the sun, how can there be days?) At first glance, if we interpret the book of Genesis as a scientific textbook, then it would seem that those critics have a case. Is Genesis a scientific textbook though?

That is where a proper interpretation of the context needs to be done. Genesis was written and inspired to present theological truth to the people of God by slowly revealing God’s plan for the salvation of the world.

Why don’t we address the issues I’ve presented above? I love the explanation Trent Horn provides for the seemingly odd creation account in his book Hard Sayings. He makes us imagine recounting to our friends a vacation we might have taken. We could recount the events in a chronological order from the beginning of the vacation on to the end, but that might be long and boring. What we would usually do is present it in a topical order, meaning we would start by recounting all the fun extraordinary things that happened to us on that vacation even if they did not happen first. [1] This is what the author of Genesis is doing in recounting the events of creation. Church Fathers such as Origen have understood this distinction also.

The Church has never had a problem with the developing of scientific theories relating to the creation of the world vs the creation account in Genesis because the author of Genesis never claims to write scientific truths about the world. Without having an official teaching on this, the Church embraces new scientific discoveries as it helps us discover the wonder and glory of God (CCC 283)

[1] Horn, Trent, Hard Sayings (Catholic Answers Press), 44-45

Faith and reason: A fool’s venture?

Faith and reason

A lot of you may be familiar with the hit series The Big Bang Theory. It is a witty, scientifically charged comedy that has attracted millions of viewers (myself included I might add). Putting its fame aside, this series exemplifies a common belief in secular society that faith is necessarily dissociated from reason. It does so none better than with Mary Cooper (Laurie Metcalfe), who plays the mother of Sheldon Cooper (Jim Parsons). Her character is that of a Christian mother who sometimes makes bigoted, racist and foolish remarks, all the while linking those remarks to her Christian values.

Mary Cooper: I tried to read your paper, but it was very hard for me to understand.

Sheldon: Oh, it’s quite straightforward, actually. It describes a new model of the universe that conceptualizes it as the surface of an n-dimensional superfluid.

Mary Cooper: Interesting. You can believe that, but God filling an ark with animals two-by-two is nonsense.

Sheldon: What did they feed the lions, Mother?

Mary Cooper: The floating bodies of drowned sinners, of course. [1]

Setting aside the comedic nature of this passage, this is the kind of remarks that are usually associated with Christian beliefs by the producers of the show. (I might talk about the book of Genesis in a future post)This is a far cry from the historical Christian belief that the articles of faith are never dissociated from reason. They are very often misunderstood.

This is the very foundation of my blog. I want to navigate the articles of faith to find the deep seating beauty that resides in them and, with reasoned dialogue, maybe have some misunderstandings clarified.

Faith and reason

Let’s start with a headline: “Faith and science…there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason”[2]. This might surprise some, but this is straight from the mouth of the Church.  But why is this? God has revealed mysteries and has given us the articles of faith but he is also the one that has provided us with our human reason. Given that God is Truth, (one of the divine attributes) Truth cannot contradict Truth by its very nature.

Why do we experience a widespread belief that faith is unreasonable? If I had to make an observation, I would say that the mainstream way of finding truth, that is, the scientific method responds to our need of satisfying the senses since it can show physically or empirically that something is true. The human experience has been gradually drifting from the philosophical to the empirical that whatever is not seen, touched or heard seems so unreal to us. It is no wonder that philosophy is now a dying science and why faith seems so unreasonable. An apparent contradiction between faith and reason is always due to some mistake in the use of reason. Be it a misunderstanding of terms, assumption of false premises or some logical error. (See Mary and Sheldon Cooper’s dialogue above) St-Thomas Aquinas writes about this in his Summa Contra Gentiles I, 7.

It is important not to make the claim that all Christian doctrines can be proved by reason, only that arguments against them can be disproved.[3]

Stay tuned for more blog posts where we will apply this historical Christian notion to concrete examples.

[1] The Big Bang Theory – The Maternal Combustion (2015)

[2] The Catechism of The Catholic Church – CCC 159

[3] Kreeft, Peter and Tacelli, Ronald, Handbook of Catholic Apologetics (Ignatius Press, 2009), 43.

Welcome!

Well… here we are! This project of mine has been a distant idea for some time now, but i’m finally ready to get started. For those who don’t know me, I am happily married and have been since July 2012. As a result, I am a father of 3 beautiful and wonderful little children. I am a Certified Professional Accountant (CPA, CGA) who works for one of the better accounting firms in the country; BDO Canada LLP. My hobbies mostly consist of anything sports related, board gaming and reading. I am of the Roman Catholic persuasion, which brings me to the reason for this site. I am looking forward to reasoned dialogue on faith matters, sprinkled with fun tidbits here and there.

I hope to be able to post articles and discussion forums on a semi-regular basis and see where it takes me.

Hope you join me on this little adventure of ours, the always evolving, far reaching search for Truth.

André Levesque CPA, CGA