By Archbishop Richard Smith
September 25, 2010

I arrived home Tuesday evening from the beatification Mass for Cardinal Newman in Birmingham, England, to see that there has been quite a lot of media coverage of the policy of the Archdiocese concerning the receipt by our parishes and institutions of revenues derived from certain gambling practices. Given some misunderstandings, I thought it would be helpful to offer some explanation of the policy.

Historical background will give some necessary perspective.

Although some people seem to have the impression this policy is a "bolt from the blue," so to speak, a complete surprise, in fact it is the conclusion of a 12-year process.

In 1998, the Bishops of Alberta issued a statement entitled The False Eden of Gambling, in which they voiced concerns over the growing prevalence of gambling in this province and its detrimental effects on individuals and families, in particular among the poor.

Since then, the Bishops of both Calgary and St. Paul have offered more teaching on this issue, and have laid down some guidelines that forbid the participation of parishes and institutions of their dioceses in gambling practices that hurt others.

My predecessor, Archbishop Collins, was transferred to Toronto before establishing a policy, so it falls to me to do so. In reality, some of our parishes, church groups and school divisions have already withdrawn from dependence on gambling revenue. Others have still to do so.

Some people appear to have been taken by surprise by the effective date of Oct. 1. This date was chosen for the entry into effect of a large range of newly revised Archdiocesan policies, among which that pertaining to gambling is only one.

Needless to say, institutions such as schools that rely to a large degree on revenues from gambling cannot be expected to change this overnight, and I have no such expectation.

Time will be needed for transitioning away from casino revenues and the exact timelines will be determined in conversation with administration officials.

What is the policy, exactly? It is important to note, first of all, that our approach to gambling is nuanced; it is not "black and white."

We recognize there are a range of practices that fall under the title "gambling," from harmless raffle tickets for a quilt to dangerous activities that feed addictive personalities and cause great harm, such as casinos.

The policy pertains precisely and only to three harmful gambling practices, namely, casinos, VLTs and high-stakes bingos. It is guided generally by the principle that we should not seek to profit from activities that we know harm others, especially the poor. From this it follows that (a) formal co-operation in these activities for fundraising purposes is not to take place; (b) application for grants from sources funded solely by harmful gambling practices is not to be made; and (c) monies offered to us by groups that have raised them through the harmful gambling practices are to be politely and respectfully declined.

Some are asking if, by this policy, I am saying all gambling is wrong, such as purchasing a ticket on a house. Again, distinctions must be made.

As the Catechism of the Catholic Church says, personal participation in a game of chance is, per se, morally neutral, but it does become morally problematic if it leads, for example, to addiction or deprives others of their due, such as family support. At the same time, Catholics are called by the Church's social doctrine to solidarity with the poor and the vulnerable of society.

This call rests on the bedrock principle of the inalienable dignity of each and every person, and summons us always to be attentive to how our individual actions may have a negative impact upon others.

In recent years, our awareness of the harmful effects of some forms of gambling on others has grown. It is this awareness, shaped by the Church's social doctrine, that has led to the policy I have put in place for the Archdiocese of Edmonton.

I am proud of the long tradition in our schools of placing the social justice mission of the Church at the centre of students' formation. This gives me confidence that a way will be found to conform fundraising practices to that tradition while maintaining overall educational excellence.

Finally, I have noticed there seems to be an automatic assumption that responsibility to make up funds no longer acquired from gambling activities continues to rest with the schools, parent councils or other groups.

Fundraising for what might have at one time been considered "extras" is now occurring for necessities, such as computers and other technology requirements. This is an unfair burden to be placed on schools and parents, a burden, I might add, that introduces inequities among schools.

A fundamental question that needs to be addressed is: why are schools and parent councils, whether in the Catholic or the public school system, being placed in the position of needing to fundraise for what are today educational necessities?

Published in The Edmonton Journal, September 25, 2010