Arlington Diocese parishioners question need for fidelity oath

  • Thread starter Thread starter markomalley
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is a simple solution, of course. Ask me to volunteer some service to the parish, but don’t ask me to participate in RCIA. (My son and I often mowed the lawn around the Rectory, and I didn’t allow him to accept any payment from the Pastor - otherwise, it wasn’t volunteering anything.)
 
So is it your position, Rich, that unless payment is forthcoming, loyalty to persons and institutions is not necessary, let alone binding?
 
Elizabeth502 said:
So is it your position, Rich, that unless payment is forthcoming, loyalty to persons and institutions is not necessary, let alone binding?
Click to expand...
Not at all; loyalty to people and organizations doesn’t depend on a written agreement, but if it entails payment, a written contract - such as an employment contract - is entirely reasonable. Were I to agree to teach RCIA (and my four years of Philosophy and Theology at Fordham University do indicate that I’d likely be qualified for the job) I’d certainly sign an employment contract if the parish were going to pay me for my services. That’s just good business.
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
Not at all; loyalty to people and organizations doesn’t depend on a written agreement, but if it entails payment, a written contract - such as an employment contract - is entirely reasonable. Were I to agree to teach RCIA (and my four years of Philosophy and Theology at Fordham University do indicate that I’d likely be qualified for the job) I’d certainly sign an employment contract if the parish were going to pay me for my services. That’s just good business.
Click to expand...
Are you aware that criteria other than “good business” drives other organzations, or departments within those organizations, to seek written affirmations? (Such as lay oblates of certain religious orders – which are associations you and I are allowed to join, for example)

Underlying your argument, it seems to me, is the principle that somehow oral and written promises are (or should be) mutually exclusive alternatives, or at least distinct in their import.
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
Not at all; loyalty to people and organizations doesn’t depend on a written agreement, but if it entails payment, a written contract - such as an employment contract - is entirely reasonable. Were I to agree to teach RCIA (and my four years of Philosophy and Theology at Fordham University do indicate that I’d likely be qualified for the job) I’d certainly sign an employment contract if the parish were going to pay me for my services. That’s just good business.
Click to expand...
Rich, you’re proposing a false dichotomy.

There’s no conflict between paid vs. unpaid work. If you want to even volunteer (for free, without pay) to work with kids in a parish in these times, you are required (probably throughout North America) to sign a form saying you understand the policies of working with kids, and more likely then not you’ll have to submit to a criminal record check (with the additional “vulnerability” check). I can say that because I’ve been through the process.

Heck, if you want to coach volunteer Little League in some places you have to submit to a criminal record check.

Here we see clear examples of requiring even volunteers to jump through hoops to provide written evidence of understanding of policies. Now, how is this example any different.
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
When I enlisted in the Air Force, later when I was commissioned as an AF officer, and later still when I was given access to highly classified (“above Top Secret”) “codeword” Signal Intelligence (SIGINT) and Human Source Intelligence (HUMINT) material, I was never asked to sign anything. It was presumed that my oaths sufficed as my bond,
Click to expand...
You never had to fill out applications for such access that required an oath that the information was true and accurate? I know that when I received my clearances, such a affirmation was required.
 
Suudy said:
You never had to fill out applications for such access that required an oath that the information was true and accurate? I know that when I received my clearances, such a affirmation was required.
Click to expand...
I was part of the Air Force Security Service (SIGINT), then was in the 6499th Special Activities Sq (HUMINT), then later was given access to highly classified satellite photography (can’t remember what the acronym was). This was in the years 1965 to 1975. Things probably have changed since then, but I don’t recall having to sign anything attesting that my information was true and accurate.

But, even if my memory has failed me, attesting that information is true isn’t the same as the kind of an oath that that bishop is calling for.

Again, whoever is willing to sign such a paper is welcome to do so, but include me out. 🙂
 
Elizabeth502 said:
Are you aware that criteria other than “good business” drives other organzations, or departments within those organizations, to seek written affirmations? (Such as lay oblates of certain religious orders – which are associations you and I are allowed to join, for example)
Click to expand...
I know nothing about such organizations.
Underlying your argument, it seems to me, is the principle that somehow oral and written promises are (or should be) mutually exclusive alternatives, or at least distinct in their import.
Click to expand...
I am only saying that my word is my bond, and if that is unacceptable to the Ordinary, he may - and undoubtedly will - get someone else to be a replacement to provide the services I would have offered. I think it would be his loss, but it is not as if there were not a horde of volunteers ready to pick up where I will not. 🤷
 
curlycool89 said:
Rich, you’re proposing a false dichotomy.

There’s no conflict between paid vs. unpaid work. If you want to even volunteer (for free, without pay) to work with kids in a parish in these times, you are required (probably throughout North America) to sign a form saying you understand the policies of working with kids, and more likely then not you’ll have to submit to a criminal record check (with the additional “vulnerability” check). I can say that because I’ve been through the process.

Heck, if you want to coach volunteer Little League in some places you have to submit to a criminal record check.

Here we see clear examples of requiring even volunteers to jump through hoops to provide written evidence of understanding of policies. Now, how is this example any different.
Click to expand...
I do understand, and have nothing against others jumping through those hoops, even submitting to a criminal record check. But, that’s not me and I’ll happily cheer on those kids and their coaches - from the sidelines. 🙂 🙂
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
I know nothing about such organizations.

I am only saying that my word is my bond, and if that is unacceptable to the Ordinary, he may - and undoubtedly will - get someone else to be a replacement to provide the services I would have offered. I think it would be his loss, but it is not as if there were not a horde of volunteers ready to pick up where I will not. 🤷
Click to expand...
What I was trying to say that there are different Catholic functions than “work” which also require a written affirmation. One of the religious orders requires that as a step in becoming a lay member (not even a “Third Order,” just a “lay member” of the Order). Hardly anything could be more voluntary than choosing to devote oneself to the charism and philosophy of a religious order. No catechesis involved, no paid or unpaid work involved. No “official function” whatsoever. Simply a necessary acknowledgement, on the part of that order, that you understand and honor the purposes of that formal assocation.
 
fix said:
I am saying that objectively it does neither of those things. Why you think it does I cannot understand.
Click to expand...
You say to-mah-to, I say to-may-to. You are not the judge of what is objective or subjective. You may say what you like, but your lack of understanding does not affect my position.
 
Elizabeth502 said:
What I was trying to say that there are different Catholic functions than “work” which also require a written affirmation. One of the religious orders requires that as a step in becoming a lay member (not even a “Third Order,” just a “lay member” of the Order). Hardly anything could be more voluntary than choosing to devote oneself to the charism and philosophy of a religious order. No catechesis involved, no paid or unpaid work involved. No “official function” whatsoever. Simply a necessary acknowledgement, on the part of that order, that you understand and honor the purposes of that formal assocation.
Click to expand...
And so, many Catholics are willing to sign an affirmation of their understanding of the purposes of those associations. I have no problem with their doing so, and depending on how the agreements are worded and what they imply, I might not object to signing, especially in the absence of an opportunity to make an oral affirmation. But, that is not what the thread is about, and given the original premises of the thread, I’ll stick to my “oath only” position.

At this point, I’m certain that we are chasing each other around a pole, and that there is not much more that can be said by me or by you or the upholders of a signed agreement that is going to change minds.

You are a fine advocate of your position, Elizabeth. I’m even more convinced now that we all lost something when you decided to not pursue the law as a career. 🙂 🙂
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
You are a fine advocate of your position, Elizabeth. I’m even more convinced now that we all lost something when you decided to not pursue the law as a career. 🙂 🙂
Click to expand...
Made My Day again, Rich. 🙂

Maybe the lesson here is that we must all pursue our avocations as well as our vocations, because sometimes God takes those as serious opportunties, too.
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
You say to-mah-to, I say to-may-to. You are not the judge of what is objective or subjective. You may say what you like, but your lack of understanding does not affect my position.
Click to expand...
Your position is that signing a profession of faith, in some strange way, affects your fildelity and honor to the Church?
 
Suudy said:
You never had to fill out applications for such access that required an oath that the information was true and accurate? I know that when I received my clearances, such a affirmation was required.
Click to expand...
Are people talking about oaths or affirmations? They are different things. Are we talking about swearing “with God as my witness, may he strike me dead if I am lying”, or are we talking “yes I affirm that I believe”. Only the first is an oath.

So many posts seem to be about a written affirmation and don’t seem to be talking about the topic at hand, namely that this piece of paper is signed under oath, and thus is not an affirmation alone.

And Rich, is your objection to the piece of *paper *or to the oath? It sounds like you are troubled by the piece of paper?

I’ve never had to swear an actual oath, even in court, not that I recall right now. It is enough to affirm in court (at least around here).
 
Pug said:
And Rich, is your objection to the piece of *paper *or to the oath? It sounds like you are troubled by the piece of paper?
Click to expand...
Yes. To me, my word (orally given) is my bond. If that doesn’t suffice in the matter we are discussing, then I shall bow out and let those who have no objections to signing an oath do so.
 
fix said:
Your position is that signing a profession of faith, in some strange way, affects your fildelity and honor to the Church?
Click to expand...
No. My position is that anyone who would ask me to sign a paper attesting to my fidelity to the Faith is questioning my oral declaration of fidelity to the Church. I don’t have anything against those who would sign such a paper. Simply, I personally would not.
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
Yes. To me, my word (orally given) is my bond. If that doesn’t suffice in the matter we are discussing, then I shall bow out and let those who have no objections to signing an oath do so.
Click to expand...
Okay, thanks. I had thought we were thinking similarly, but I suspect not, now. I’ll go back and re-read some of your posts to better understand, and to stop confusing your position with mine. We do seem to agree on not caring for them not trusting our word.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top