Archdiocese Letter Warns Employees About Supporting Same-Sex Marriage

[_Abyssinia]

The Archdiocese of Miami is warning employees that they could be fired for any conduct that is “inconsistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church" in the wake of the start of same-sex marriages in Florida.
The letter, from Archbishop Thomas Wenski, told employees that "because of the Church’s particular function in society, certain conduct, inconsistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church, could lead to disciplinary action, including termination, even if it occurs outside the normal working day and outside the strict confines of work performed by the employee for the Archdiocese.”

Wenski’s letter also warned employees that the conduct requirements also extend to the Internet. “Employees should exercise discretion when posting on social media sites, and note that online activity indicative of prohibitive behaviors may subject an employee to disciplinary action or termination," it read.

nbcmiami.com/news/local/Archdiocese-Letter-Warns-Employees-About-Supporting-Same-Sex-Marriage-287597661.html

 

[Richard_White]

Good. We need to stand up and remain the “house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15).

May God bless you all abundantly and forever!

 

[ComplineSanFran]

So the Archbishop is saying that ‘Employee Jane’, who is on the Housekeeping staff of the one of the office buildings, and works primarily at night, cannot go to her niece’s house for lunch because her niece is married to another woman. Nor can she post pictures of their new baby daughter on Facebook. Do I have that right?

 

[Memaw]

Good. We need to stand up and remain the “house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15).

May God bless you all abundantly and forever!

AMEN, God Bless, Memaw

 

[Suudy]

So the Archbishop is saying that ‘Employee Jane’, who is on the Housekeeping staff of the one of the office buildings, and works primarily at night, cannot go to her niece’s house for lunch because her niece is married to another woman. Nor can she post pictures of their new baby daughter on Facebook. Do I have that right?

So, you interpret the letter to mean that Employee Jane having lunch with her niece is supporting gay marriage? Or sharing pictures of her grand-niece is supporting gay marriage? So you think having lunch and doting on a grandniece is supporting gay marriage. Do I have that right?

 

[Pulvis]

So the Archbishop is saying that ‘Employee Jane’, who is on the Housekeeping staff of the one of the office buildings, and works primarily at night, cannot go to her niece’s house for lunch because her niece is married to another woman. Nor can she post pictures of their new baby daughter on Facebook. Do I have that right?

If she is employed by the Archdiocese, and the job requirements are known up front, then no, she cannot do anything openly on the job that would promote a deviant lifestyle which is against scripture and the Church. I know you will disagree, but that is what being a Christian, a follower of Christ Jesus means; loving everyone yet turning away from sin and the world. Included in this is to council sinners and help them to repent and amend their lives.

 

[signit]

So the Archbishop is saying that ‘Employee Jane’, who is on the Housekeeping staff of the one of the office buildings, and works primarily at night, cannot go to her niece’s house for lunch because her niece is married to another woman. Nor can she post pictures of their new baby daughter on Facebook. Do I have that right?

I generally support the right of a Catholic-affiliated employer to make the call.

But if it were up to me there’d be consistency.

I wouldn’t fire Jane the housekeeper described above and then look the other way if Lucy the lunch lady lives with a man before marriage and posts pictures of their child on Facebook.

 

[CarolNoel]

Great letter.

 

[Johann_du_Toit]

As the old saying goes, when in Rome…

 

[ComplineSanFran]

I wouldn’t fire Jane the housekeeper described above and then look the other way if Lucy the lunch lady lives with a man before marriage and posts pictures of their child on Facebook.

Agreed. Where is the line though? In the hiring contract, do you have a checklist? What is on that checklist? It calls to mind the teacher who conceived via IVF quite openly - a very legal and logical step to her since she was not Catholic and had no clue this was going against Catholic teaching.

So it would seem that Catholic institutions would either hire all practicing and informed Catholics (does that include temps? consultants? substitute teachers? per diem nurses?) or have a very clear and precise checklist. Those of us who are not Catholic are often baffled by the things on your list. Perhaps you might want to consult with the Mormons on how they approach this dilemma.

 

[Louie1983]

Agreed. Where is the line though? In the hiring contract, do you have a checklist? What is on that checklist? It calls to mind the teacher who conceived via IVF quite openly - a very legal and logical step to her since she was not Catholic and had no clue this was going against Catholic teaching.

So it would seem that Catholic institutions would either hire all practicing and informed Catholics (does that include temps? consultants? substitute teachers? per diem nurses?) or have a very clear and precise checklist. Those of us who are not Catholic are often baffled by the things on your list. Perhaps you might want to consult with the Mormons on how they approach this dilemma.

Why, because they keep in line with church teaching?

A catholic institution wants to uphold it’s teachings in it’s positions…shock horror.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

Why, because they keep in line with church teaching?

No, not at all. The list itself is confusing. Your church is quite free to teach anything it wants to.

If I were to use as an example the LDS church, perhaps it might be clearer. They also can teach whatever they want to and expect members to follow such teachings. If an employee of their church, however, not an LDS member, was expected to keep the same rules and didn’t know or understand what the rules were, it would be helpful to know that in some cases having a cup of hot chocolate was not permitted. (I know, I know, ‘hot drinks’ may not include hot chocolate, but for some people it does.)

Now, as a good Presbyterian worker, why would you assume that having a cup of hot chocolate get you fired? It wouldn’t cross your mind. And even if you had a cup at home and posted a picture on Facebook of you drinking it in front of the fire? Even more evidence to get you fired, regardless of it being on your own time and in your own home. Do you see?

 

[Louie1983]

No, not at all. The list itself is confusing. Your church is quite free to teach anything it wants to.

If I were to use as an example the LDS church, perhaps it might be clearer. They also can teach whatever they want to and expect members to follow such teachings. If an employee of their church, however, not an LDS member, was expected to keep the same rules and didn’t know or understand what the rules were, it would be helpful to know that in some cases having a cup of hot chocolate was not permitted. (I know, I know, ‘hot drinks’ may not include hot chocolate, but for some people it does.)

Now, as a good Presbyterian worker, why would you assume that having a cup of hot chocolate get you fired? It wouldn’t cross your mind. And even if you had a cup at home and posted a picture on Facebook of you drinking it in front of the fire? Even more evidence to get you fired, regardless of it being on your own time and in your own home. Do you see?

Have you got a copy of this “list” you refer to?

 

[ComplineSanFran]

Have you got a copy of this “list” you refer to?

Well, that is what I asked earlier. Where is the list? Who has one? How is a person to know what is allowed and what is not, especially non-Catholics? If the Archdiocese wants their employees to obey all Catholic rules, both in the workplace and outside the workplace, then they had better come up with a list of do’s and don’ts.

 

[AnneElizabeth]

So the Archbishop is saying that ‘Employee Jane’, who is on the Housekeeping staff of the one of the office buildings, and works primarily at night, cannot go to her niece’s house for lunch because her niece is married to another woman. Nor can she post pictures of their new baby daughter on Facebook. Do I have that right?

Yeah, that is a concern… IF the scenario you present here is true.

If they mean outward supporting as in wearing a button that says “I support gay marriage” all the while stating to the world they are Catholics, then yeah, it would make sense to have a church member questioned over it. But not if someone is just being kind and talking to people who happen to live in a gay marriage, or even providing them with sustenance, good company or what-have-you. … that would go against The Lord’s teaching if one DIDN’T do those things.

 

[AnneElizabeth]

Good. We need to stand up and remain the “house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15).

May God bless you all abundantly and forever!

Hmm… This doesn’t sound good at all to me. And I hold dear the teachings of Jesus Christ and His Church.

 I didn't read the letter, but just the snippet provided in the original post... Its not clear as to what would demand action.  Its threatening =the use of the word "warn", makes it appear like a person with his hand ready to strike- a threat.  Its also ambiguous of what their expectation of the people is.... how stressful.

** There is NO bishop or archbishop or pope that doesn’t realize that there has been a severe problem in people not being properly catechized for the past few decades!** I fear that whatever action they are threatening to take may punish some innocents in the process. Jesus said that there would be chaff among the wheat and not to pull them up lest we pull up the baby wheat as well.

 

[exnihilo]

Now, as a good Presbyterian worker, why would you assume that having a cup of hot chocolate get you fired? It wouldn’t cross your mind. And even if you had a cup at home and posted a picture on Facebook of you drinking it in front of the fire? Even more evidence to get you fired, regardless of it being on your own time and in your own home. Do you see?

You might be right that such things would not cross the mind of workers today. But we have an exceptionally ignorant society. We know all sorts of stupid facts about sports figures or celebrities but almost nothing about anything of substance. What the Catholic Church teaches may seem odd to many folks, but it isn’t obscure. The Church’s teaching also doesn’t cover minutiae. It teaches on broad subjects. It is obviously true that the teaching will impact details of a man’s life. But it really isn’t hard to think that through.

To answer your question if the Church taught that drinking hot chocolate were wrong and an employee was too lazy to discover this then he is a good candidate to be fired simply for his laziness. Of course nothing so silly as drinking hot chocolate is prohibited. It is primarily things like abortion, same sex marriage, and contraception that are at issue. Who wouldn’t know the Church’s stance on this? And despite common opinion these are all very grave matters.

 

[ComplineSanFran]

Of course nothing so silly as drinking hot chocolate is prohibited. It is primarily things like abortion, same sex marriage, and contraception that are at issue. Who wouldn’t know the Church’s stance on this? And despite common opinion these are all very grave matters.

Well, in my argument, drinking hot chocolate was based in LDS practices, not RC. And I believe that employees of the Archdiocese are being held accountable for all Catholic teachings, whether they are members or not. It would be extremely helpful to have a list, as I said before. Does it include divorce and remarriage? All contraception? Fasting? Going to Mass? What about their own worship services? Allowed or not allowed? Not allowing contact with gay family members/friends or their families? Who they vote for?

These are all pretty strict rules for someone who is not Roman Catholic yet receives a paycheck from the Archdiocese.

 

[ProdigalSun]

Agreed. Where is the line though? In the hiring contract, do you have a checklist? What is on that checklist? It calls to mind the teacher who conceived via IVF quite openly - a very legal and logical step to her since she was not Catholic and had no clue this was going against Catholic teaching.

So it would seem that Catholic institutions would either hire all practicing and informed Catholics (does that include temps? consultants? substitute teachers? per diem nurses?) or have a very clear and precise checklist. Those of us who are not Catholic are often baffled by the things on your list. Perhaps you might want to consult with the Mormons on how they approach this dilemma.

Yeah list are good. Your Bishop tried to make a list and it was seen as a bad thing, I may be wrong but I believe you were up I arms about that one. The church needs to consult no one. We will indeed see more “checklist” in the future, this will become necessary.

There is nothing wrong with anyone visiting their gay son and other. Come to work and glorify it or create scandal and there will be issues.

pretty simple and straight forward really.

 

[ProdigalSun]

Well, in my argument, drinking hot chocolate was based in LDS practices, not RC. And I believe that employees of the Archdiocese are being held accountable for all Catholic teachings, whether they are members or not. It would be extremely helpful to have a list, as I said before. Does it include divorce and remarriage? All contraception? Fasting? Going to Mass? What about their own worship services? Allowed or not allowed? Not allowing contact with gay family members/friends or their families? Who they vote for?

These are all pretty strict rules for someone who is not Roman Catholic yet receives a paycheck from the Archdiocese.

Are you serious with the stupidity of this post? Fasting? Going to Mass? Contact with a gay person? You are either completely ignorant on what is being talked about here or you choose to be rather silly.

You have more than likely been told probably more than once divorce is not a sin. Remarriage can pose a problem if scandal is created.