S
Sailor_Kenshin
Guest
I get very tired of arguing the point that REAL love means wanting the best for someone, not applauding him in his mortal sin.
No Problem with Civil Unions for Catholic Church: English Bishop
- Status
N
nsper7
Guest
How should a Catholic view the idea of Domestic Partnership registries which provide benefits such as visitation rights, etc. to unmarried individuals regardless of sexual orientation? In my campaign, I am getting hit with that question.
J
jdnation
Guest
Many use the argument that homosexual partners need marriage or legal unions to get visitation rights etc. etc. But this is a convenient misleading. I can understand that these are legitimate issues though, but instead it is really visitation rights and other legal regulations that ought to be revisited, revised and altered to accomodate those needs. Not marriage.
N
nsper7
Guest
My understanding is that ‘domestic partners’ is NOT a civil union (I live in FL, SSM and civil unions are banned by the state constitution due to a recently voted on amendment). My understanding is that is just a registry any two people who live together can sign up for so that they get certain benefits (including visitation rights and possibly insurance rights). Could a Catholic support this since it is not claiming to be marriage or a legally-recognized “civil” union?
J
JReducation
Guest
I would have to ask several questions before supporting such a registry.
- Are the rights that the registry protects not protected under other state laws?
- Are they truly human rights? For example, a parent has a human right to visit his or her child, if the parent is not a threat to the child, regardless of the parent’s sexual orientation. The child has the right to be visited by the parent. That’s a human right. The question is, isn’t this basic human right covered under the State Constitution?
- Why are these rights not protected under other existing laws? If it’s a case where one can honestly say that the rights were never covered, because the issue did not exist before, then there may be some validity to the registry. But then, there is also an obligation on the part of legislators to create laws that respond to human rights issues that arise, not just create registries.
- How does such a registry define domestic partners? If they only include those who have lived together as couples (gay or straight), then the registry is giving marital attributes to domestic partnership. If the registry includes housemates, adult parents and adult children, adult relatives of varying degrees of cosanguinity, then it is not giving marital attributes to domestic partnership. In other words, if I live wiht my adult child who has children (my grandchildren) and we register in this registry, would that give me the right to visit my grandchildren should my son and I have a fall-out and I move out?
- Does the registry protect people against possible domestic violence? To grant rights to someone, while placing them in danger is not a benefit.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
N
nsper7
Guest
I think I have answered my own question since later on in the questionnaire, the group defines domestic partnership as being included among “any other union that is the equivalent [of same-sex marriage]”. Thus, under that definition, I cannot support ‘domestic partnerships’.I would have to ask several questions before supporting such a registry.
The registry would have to protect human rights. That is a moral imperative. We must protect human rights. It cannot grant rights that are exceed human rights and by doing so put others in harms way. That’s a moral violation.
- Are the rights that the registry protects not protected under other state laws?
- Are they truly human rights? For example, a parent has a human right to visit his or her child, if the parent is not a threat to the child, regardless of the parent’s sexual orientation. The child has the right to be visited by the parent. That’s a human right. The question is, isn’t this basic human right covered under the State Constitution?
- Why are these rights not protected under other existing laws? If it’s a case where one can honestly say that the rights were never covered, because the issue did not exist before, then there may be some validity to the registry. But then, there is also an obligation on the part of legislators to create laws that respond to human rights issues that arise, not just create registries.
- How does such a registry define domestic partners? If they only include those who have lived together as couples (gay or straight), then the registry is giving marital attributes to domestic partnership. If the registry includes housemates, adult parents and adult children, adult relatives of varying degrees of cosanguinity, then it is not giving marital attributes to domestic partnership. In other words, if I live wiht my adult child who has children (my grandchildren) and we register in this registry, would that give me the right to visit my grandchildren should my son and I have a fall-out and I move out?
- Does the registry protect people against possible domestic violence? To grant rights to someone, while placing them in danger is not a benefit.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Now, can I “support including specific training regarding sexual orientation and gender identity in diversity training programs for public employees?”
What about supporting “policies banning discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in housing, employment, public accommodations and other vital areas?”
What about supporting “safe school policies that include protections from bullying and harassment based on race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, national origin or disability?”
As a Catholic, can I support these policies? I think so, but I am not sure and that is why I am asking others.
L
Lief_Erikson
Guest
You know, if you’re a politician, I recommend bringing these questions up in the “Ask an Apologist” forum. I think you deserve an answer with more authority than the rest of us can give, though we can cite official documents and such for you to read, which I’m sure is helpful.
J
JReducation
Guest
Yes you can. Even in the case of homosexual people, the Church is very clear that their rights as human beings cannot be violated: housing, employment, access to a parish, membership in their families, parental (if they have children), the right to be safe and treated with kindness and rspect.
Can you and should you support community education programs that promote human treatment of all individuals, regardless of race, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, or national origin? Of coruse. The Church protects these rights, because they come from God. They are part of being human.
The school example that you cited is a no brainer. Of course children and teachers of a right to work and study in an enviornment that is free of bullying, harrassment, ridicule, negligence, or abuse of any kind.
As long as you stick with human rights, you are on good moral ground. The law can throw in a few bonuses that are not human rights, but do not violate human rights or moral law. Those too can be supported. What the law cannot morally do is to declare a right something that endangers the moral, psychological or physical well-being of individuals. Such a law is without moral justification.
The support of laws that protect human rights and the opposition to those that endanger them is a moral issue, not a political one, as many want to say. People will often claim that the Church is overstepping its bounds and becoming political as a way of protecting themselves from being called out for moral trespassing (my term).
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
JReducation
Guest
This is true. He can also read the Church’s social teachings. They are found in the CCC and in different Church documents.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
R
RobbyS
Guest
I am talking about history and you are talking about canon law. Yes, I know the formal limitations. What I am talking about is the destruction of the informal restraints on the colleges arising from their loyalty to and deference to the bishops. Jenkins “grew up” in aWe have to understand where the authority of the bishops begin and end. Take for example the Catholic colleges and the Lando o Lakes Declaration or Notre Dame. The bishops have no authority over Catholic colleges or universities that do not belong to the Catholic Church. Most Catholic colleges and universities are the property of religious congregations or non-profit corporations. They are Catholic; but they are not under the jurisdiction of the Church. Therefore, their cooperation with Church authority is really up to their leaders, not the bishops. The bishops want to see good things happen at all of our colleges and universities, but they don’t have the jurisdiction to interfere in the internal decisions of these institutions.
For example, Fr. Jenkins is a member of the Brothers of the Holy Cross. The Brothers are a Congregation of Pontifical Right. Only the Pope has the authority to demand his resignation. The bishops cannot do that. If they did, they would be in very serious trouble with the Holy Father for overstepping their authority. Bishops do not have authority over religiuos of Pontifical Right, only the Pope does.
A bishop has no jurisdiction over a priest who leaves the priesthood. He only has jurisdiction over those who remain, provided that the priest is a secular. If the priest is a religious, the bishop has no jurisdiction either. When a priest leaves without permission, he excommunicates himself. Once he does that, he is canonically outside of the authority and reach of the bishop. There is nothing that a bishop is allowed to do.
The “emptying seminaries” is not an area over which the bishops have authority. The bishop cannot order men to enter a seminary. His authority is limited to calling men to Holy Orders. He cannot demand that they remain or that they enter. The only ones who actually have the authority to demand that men enter the seminary are superiors of brothers communities, not bishops. In these communities, the brothers make a vow of obedience to the superior. But in the secular world, secular men do not make a vow of obedience to the bishop. Secular men make a promise of obedience to the bishop on the day that they are ordained to the diaconate, either transitional or permanent.
If the seminary belongs to the diocese, the bishop has jurisdiction over the discipline of the seminary and the formation given at the seminary, but not over the men who are students there. They are free to leave at any time until they are ordained deacons.
If it’s a house of formation, the bishop has no jurisdiction and is not even allowed oversight of it. The oversight belongs to the Superior General of the religious who study there. Bishops cannot overstep the authority of superiors of religious men or women.
We have to be careful not to blame bishops for areas that are not under their jurisdiction. Jursidiction was what go Archbishop Lefebvre excommunicated. No bishop can act contrary to canon law. That is a violation of jurisdiction. Some violations of jurisdiction are more serious than others. They can carry excommunication or at the very least a reprimand from the Holy Father.
For example, if the bishop had mandated that Fr. Jenkins resign, that bishop would have been in very serious trouble with the Pope. That role is reserved to two people: the Provincial Superior of the Holy Cross Brothers and the Pope. The bishops have to be very careful what they say and how they say it. They can suggest that Fr. Jenkins resign. They can’t even ask the Provincial Superior to transfer him. The Provincial Superior of the Brothers of the Holy Cross has the same authority as a bishop. He answers to the Pope, not to the bishops.
Remember, the bishops really have authority over the laity and over secular clergy. Religious are not part of any diocese. Catholic colleges and universities are usually not part of any diocese. Often, seminaries are not part of any diocese, they are regional. They are governed by a board of regents that represent many bishops.
A good example is the apostolic visitation of the sisters. The bishops’ hands are tied because the sisters belong to Pontifical institutes. They answer to the Holy Father. If he does not call them on the carpet, the bishop cannot do it. He can invite them to talk. He can ask them not to work for his diocese. But he cannot dismantle them or their institutions.
The relationship between a bishop and secular clergy is different. They belong to his diocese. They owe him obedience in all pastoral matters. The other group that the bishop has the authority to govern is the laity. He can govern institutions that are owned by the diocese. Those he can open and close, unless they were canonically erected. Then he cannot do that. But if they were erected by the diocese, the diocese can close them.
I hope this clarifies this point.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Church that had, to a considerable extent, abandoned the patriarchical rule of the pre-council episcopacy. Now schools like Georgetown are pretty much in the same condition that Yale was when William Buckley attended. Unless things change, and they could, Notre Dame will be as secular as Yale and Harvard are today within a short period of time.
J
JReducation
Guest
This may be true and these schools have an obligation to self-correct. But their weakness is not a reflection on the bishops. That’s my point. We cannot blame the bishops because they have no authority over certain areas. We can blame individuals for not being faithful and for not being “team players.” I agree with that.
I’ll give you a simple example. My religius community is a community of Pontifical Right. We operate outside of the authority of the bishops, except when we work in their ministries. Obviously in those specific situations they are our bosses. However, we have a long tradition and a statute in the rule, written by St. Francis. It clearly states tha
t our obedience is in this order: Pope, Francis, our brothers, major superior, and bishop(s).
Because of this “safeguard” (quotation is mine), you can go to Franciscan Univessity, St. Francis University, U. of St. Bonaventure and other colleges and universities run by the friars and you will find a lot of support for the Church’s teachings. People will complain about not liking this because it’s too charismatic or that because it’s too conservative or the liturgy because it’s not the EF, but you rarely hear complaints about disobedience to the Church. This is not to say that every individual friar is a model of obedience. Every friar should be; but every family should also be a loving center of spiritual life and the reality is that this is not the case. But in general, there is a strong support for the Church at these institutions. They are not the only ones Many other Catholic institutions are also doing well and are not being recognized.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
S
Sailor_Kenshin
Guest
I wonder how the Church, which condemns fornication and public adultery of all sorts, can possibly recognize even ‘civil unions.’
Seems to me that the Bishop mis-spoke himself.
Seems to me that the Bishop mis-spoke himself.
R
RobbyS
Guest
I take your point. I am simply saying that the aftermath of the Council was a disaster. It took me many years and some close reading of Reformation history that we had a repeat of that sad experience, except that. thank, God, the different sides did not have governments on their side to punish the minorities. The early reformers were all priests and most were religious. Indeed the root of it all was perhaps in the “spiritualism” of the Middle Ages. No Francis, indeed no Dominic, this time to caution the rebels and prevent the splintering.This may be true and these schools have an obligation to self-correct. But their weakness is not a reflection on the bishops. That’s my point. We cannot blame the bishops because they have no authority over certain areas. We can blame individuals for not being faithful and for not being “team players.” I agree with that.
I’ll give you a simple example. My religius community is a community of Pontifical Right. We operate outside of the authority of the bishops, except when we work in their ministries. Obviously in those specific situations they are our bosses. However, we have a long tradition and a statute in the rule, written by St. Francis. It clearly states tha
t our obedience is in this order: Pope, Francis, our brothers, major superior, and bishop(s).
Because of this “safeguard” (quotation is mine), you can go to Franciscan Univessity, St. Francis University, U. of St. Bonaventure and other colleges and universities run by the friars and you will find a lot of support for the Church’s teachings. People will complain about not liking this because it’s too charismatic or that because it’s too conservative or the liturgy because it’s not the EF, but you rarely hear complaints about disobedience to the Church. This is not to say that every individual friar is a model of obedience. Every friar should be; but every family should also be a loving center of spiritual life and the reality is that this is not the case. But in general, there is a strong support for the Church at these institutions. They are not the only ones Many other Catholic institutions are also doing well and are not being recognized.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
R
robin_hood
Guest
Bishop Malcolm is my local Bishop and I will continue to pray for him ,sadly he comes from the more liberal side of the Church as does most of the English bishops.
This liberal stance of the English Bishops has been going on far to long and greater care should be taken when choosing new bishops.
This liberal stance of the English Bishops has been going on far to long and greater care should be taken when choosing new bishops.
J
JReducation
Guest
I will offer one word of caution. We must stay away from labels such as “liberal” or “conservative”.
The great reformers in the Catholic Church were looked upon as liberals in their day and as traditionalists in our own.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
The great reformers in the Catholic Church were looked upon as liberals in their day and as traditionalists in our own.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
- Status