Lawsuits Againest Catholic Chuch

[susanbennett]

I think lawsuits againest the Catholic Church are going beyond justice. Some must be graft.

If the Church is a Community (Family) why are they being treated as a corporation? If one member of nuclear family was being sued they couldn’t sue the entire family.

 

[Marauder]

I think you are confusing the church with the Church. Different aspects of the church are fallable and can make mistakes. If they make mistakes they can and should be held accountable.

The Church as a whole is infallable.

It’s one thing to go after a priest, bishop etc. for things like embezzelment, child abuse etc. It’s another thing to go against the Church for things about its morals (i.e. forcing Catholic Charities to provide birth control)

 

[katherine2]

susanbennett:

I think lawsuits againest the Catholic Church are going beyond justice. Some must be graft.

If the Church is a Community (Family) why are they being treated as a corporation? If one member of nuclear family was being sued they couldn’t sue the entire family.

The Church is treated as a corporation because the bishop insist on doing so in order to keep their power.

 

[Buzzard]

Marauder:

I think you are confusing the church with the Church. Different aspects of the church are fallable and can make mistakes. If they make mistakes they can and should be held accountable.

The Church as a whole is infallable.

It’s one thing to go after a priest, bishop etc. for things like embezzelment, child abuse etc. It’s another thing to go against the Church for things about its morals (i.e. forcing Catholic Charities to provide birth control)

The way the church got into trouble over

• (i.e. forcing Catholic Charities to provide birth control)

was same as other groups; Protestants also
They contracted or hired themselves to do job for the Govt,
and being paid to do so,
and like all contracts, the parties “Agreed” to certain things
one was “Benifits” for the employee
health ins being one of them, and Birth control is part of that

#2:
The Catholic worker, or anyone else for that matter
does not have too use it

#3:
At the anual company picnic there is always cold beer,
but nobody forces me to drink it

 

[Amadeus]

Dear SusanBennett:

The answer to your question, as far as the juridical existence of the Catholic Church is concerned, requires a lengthy legal treatise.

This is an attempt for a short version, which shows the very “special” status of the Catholic Church:

(1) On the global level, the Catholic Church is endowed with a juridical (by fiction of law) existence as a State, complete with a territory (the Vatican City-State within the City of Rome), a government (the Pope, assisted by the Roman Curia), and people (the Pope and the clergy residing within Vatican’s territory).

As such, the Catholic Church (now existing “juridically” as a State by virtue of international law and comity) cannot be sued, like any other member-State of the United Nations, without its express consent. (By the way, the Vatican City-Sate, or interchangeably the Holy See, is the ONLY non-secular member-State of the UN).

(2) Let’s now consider the local or particular Catholic Churches. Under the Code of Canons, a “particular” Catholic Church is the Diocese/Archdiocese and not the parish Church nor the national aggrupation of dioceses, such as the Catholic Church in the U.S.A.

In all countries of the world, there are legal strictures for the organization, ownership, and management of “religious organizations” like a Church which, in turn, are endowed with a “personality,” albeit artificial, versus the natural personality of a human being. Again, these religious organizations are assuming a “juridical” existence.

Now, as an “artificial person,” a religious organization can interact with other persons, natural or artificial, and can acquire and possess properties. One interaction could be considered criminal, like what happened in the child abuse scandals.

In the U.S., and in most countries, the preferred method of acquiring such juridical personality followed by most, if not all, of the “particular” Catholic Churches is by “incorporation” under the various States.

Under these State laws, there is a provision recognizing an ancient practice of the Catholic Church to have its “particular” Churches (the dioceses) incorporate as “Corporation Soles,” i.e., the local Bishop/Achbishop “incorporates” himself as the sole representation of the Diocese/Archdiocese.

However, particular Churches are not immune to suits. If and when the diocese/archdiocese is sued, the Bishop/Archbishop answers the charges as the “Corporation Sole.”

I hope this helps.

 

[kmktexas]

Buzzard:

The way the church got into trouble over

• (i.e. forcing Catholic Charities to provide birth control)

was same as other groups; Protestants also
They contracted or hired themselves to do job for the Govt,
and being paid to do so,
and like all contracts, the parties “Agreed” to certain things
one was “Benifits” for the employee
health ins being one of them, and Birth control is part of that

#2:
The Catholic worker, or anyone else for that matter
does not have too use it

#3:
At the anual company picnic there is always cold beer,
but nobody forces me to drink it

The problem with this line of thought is that it isn’t the Catholic worker who is being punished, it is the Catholic employer.

#1 When the employees came on board, they were offered a benefit package that did not include birth control. The State of California is who ordered it. It wasn’t part of the original employment contract.

#2 The Catholic worker isn’t forced to use it but he/she does pay for it indirectly. Also the Catholic employer is forced to pay for it directly.

#3 If the annual company picnic is given by a company with a strict tea totaler for an owner, you shouldn’t expect beer.

Catholic charities is not a community organization in the sence that it is funded by taxpayers. If that was the case, let the state make all the rules it wants. It is funded by the Church.

Where does it stop? Can the state order the Church to include abortions or sterilizations in its coverage too?

There is a real Catch-22 involved as well. The state says that Catholic Charities has to include BC as a benefit because its employees aren’t all Catholic. If the employees were all Catholic, the state would accuse it of religious discrimination.

 

[puzzleannie]

katherine2:

The Church is treated as a corporation because the bishop insist on doing so in order to keep their power.

not quite, at least in this country most dioceses are established legally as a corporation sole in the name of the bishop to conform with civil law. Federal law, including the IRS, and every state defines legal designations for persons and organizations, especially those that collect income and hire employees. The corporation sole is the legal form that best meets the needs of the local church (the diocese) and the law.

 

[katherine2]

puzzleannie:

not quite, at least in this country most dioceses are established legally as a corporation sole in the name of the bishop to conform with civil law. Federal law, including the IRS, and every state defines legal designations for persons and organizations, especially those that collect income and hire employees. The corporation sole is the legal form that best meets the needs of the local church (the diocese) and the law.

The civil law does not force the church to incorporate as it does. It offers certain advantages to the Church when it does so. We should not both take advantage of those things yet complain when others hold the corporation responsible.