Peterborough [Ontario] Bishop Faces Human Rights Complaint

[centurionguard]

By John-Henry Westen, Lifesitenews

PETERBOROUGH, ONTARIO CANADA, July 7, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Jim Corcoran, the owner of one of Canada’s largest and most lavish spas, has launched a human rights complaint against the Bishop of Peterborough Ontario for refusing him permission to continue to serve as an altar server.

Corcoran admits that he is homosexual and lives with another homosexual man, but says that he follows the Church’s teaching and lives a chaste lifestyle. According to the Catholic Register, Bishop Nicola De Angelis asked Corcoran to accept his decision that he not serve on the altar based upon the bishops’ desire to avoid public scandal.

Corcoran is seeking monetary damages of $25,000 from the bishop and $20,000 each from 12 parishioners who complained to the bishop about Corcoran and his roommate having been invited by the local priest to serve on the altar at Masses.

That priest, Fr. Allan Hood, of St. Michael the Archangel Parish, was not available to speak with LifeSiteNews.com.

Corcoran spoke with Michael Swan of The Catholic Register but Bishop De Angelis has not commented on the matter publicly. LifeSiteNews.com called the chancery office for more information, but there was no answer.

 

[canadianguy1143]

Thread already started:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=355414

 

[rlg94086]

By John-Henry Westen, Lifesitenews

PETERBOROUGH, ONTARIO CANADA, July 7, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Jim Corcoran, the owner of one of Canada’s largest and most lavish spas, has launched a human rights complaint against the Bishop of Peterborough Ontario for refusing him permission to continue to serve as an altar server.

Corcoran admits that he is homosexual and lives with another homosexual man, but says that he follows the Church’s teaching and lives a chaste lifestyle. According to the Catholic Register, Bishop Nicola De Angelis asked Corcoran to accept his decision that he not serve on the altar based upon the bishops’ desire to avoid public scandal.

Corcoran is seeking monetary damages of $25,000 from the bishop and $20,000 each from 12 parishioners who complained to the bishop about Corcoran and his roommate having been invited by the local priest to serve on the altar at Masses.

That priest, Fr. Allan Hood, of St. Michael the Archangel Parish, was not available to speak with LifeSiteNews.com.

Corcoran spoke with Michael Swan of The Catholic Register but Bishop De Angelis has not commented on the matter publicly. LifeSiteNews.com called the chancery office for more information, but there was no answer.

Not knowing the situation, it is hard to tell whether Mr. Corcoran’s situation is scandalous or not. I did a quick google and someone mentioned that “Owner Jim Corcoran, and his partner David, are also a big part of the Ste. Anne’s spa experience, mixing hospitality with fun.” If David is the aforementioned roommate and Mr. Corcoran refers to his “roommate” as his “partner,” then this obviously leads one to believe that they are more than a “disinterested friendship.” That is what would cause scandal. It would be the same as a heterosexual man living with a woman whom he calls his “partner.” I would expect a bishop to remove such a person from their role, as well.

If, on the other hand, he were to have a housemate that is a friend and is just referred to as “a good friend,” then people are making uncharitable assumptions.

 

[Belloc_Fan]

I understand the standard but my questions still remain from before.

How absolute is that? What if a church (say a non-catholic) said that blacks couldn’t be allowed on the altar?

This was more or less the position of the LDS Church until 1978. And while it’s unpleasant, how can we say it’s illegal?

How long before we use these sorts of secular humanistic rationales to say that women must be allowed to become priestesses?

 

[fix]

I understand the standard but my questions still remain from before.

How absolute is that? What if a church (say a non-catholic) said that blacks couldn’t be allowed on the altar?

Who is the authority in these matters? Is it the state or the Church? Does the state get to dictate how Church services are to run?

 

[Zundrah]

This was more or less the position of the LDS Church until 1978. And while it’s unpleasant, how can we say it’s illegal?

How long before we use these sorts of secular humanistic rationales to say that women must be allowed to become priestesses?

This is a bit different from comparing women as priests… Gay sex is considered a sin…that’s a whole different chapter.

Yes or no; should gay people work in churches?

Place your votes now!

 

[Norminha]

canadianguy1143

To this gay male, having a male roommate is equivalent to a female roommate for any of us guys who are straight. There is the appearance of scandal.

Precisely. The Bishop asked him not to serve anymore, to avoid the scandal.
If the parish members started complaining and did not like this type of server, what position is left to the poor Bishop?
Secularism is pushing the Catholic Church more and more to the corner with the only intention, to silence the Truth, but what are we doing to defend our rights, our Faith?
We need to be well informed of all that’s going on and more importantly, to know our Faith and rights. We can’t be conformed with the dictate of the world because we well know where it comes from.
The Church is living very INTENSE moments; Satan is attacking us from all four corners. It is time for the Members of the Body of Christ not to be simple spectators anymore but, in virtue of our baptism, take up our weapons(pray/rosaries/fasting) and boldly defend and proclaim the Truth of Jesus Christ and His Church. This is a war that needs all our zeal and courage to defend what no one can take away, our Christian rights. Christ Himself empowered us all the power we need to fight the good fight.
With Christ, who strengthen us, we can do all things!!!
REMEMBER, WE’RE LIVING THE YEAR OF THE "PRIESTS"

 

[didymus]

It might also be interesting to see how many other altar servers were investigated to see if they were sinners. If all sinners had been removed then the church may well have had a case on religions grounds. If some sinners were retained while other sinners were refused then the church’s legal case is less secure.

rossum

I’ve wondered the same thing.
At parishes I’ve attended there were lectors, choir members (& maybe altar servers or EMHCs for all I know) who were living together w/o benefit of marriage or divorced and remarried, which is scandal.

 

[Belloc_Fan]

I’ve wondered the same thing.
At parishes I’ve attended there were lectors, choir members (& maybe altar servers or EMHCs for all I know) who were living together w/o benefit of marriage or divorced and remarried, which is scandal.

This may well be true, but it would just be reason to remove anyone else who publicly and purposely lives in defiance of Church teachings. It’s a reason to raise our standards, not lower them!

 

[Neil_Anthony]

I’ve wondered the same thing.
At parishes I’ve attended there were lectors, choir members (& maybe altar servers or EMHCs for all I know) who were living together w/o benefit of marriage or divorced and remarried, which is scandal.

That’s an unusual situation if your parish did that. Normally people who volunteer at church have to be living the Catholic faith.

 

[Holly3278]

Oh brother! This is just sickening. As the OP has said, is this when we start moving underground? I mean really. The Church in Canada is clearly being persecuted quite seriously when they can’t even question the fact that a gay man is an altar server. The “gay rights” movement just absolutely sickens me. They’ll do anything to make the lives of those who oppose their lifestyle worse.

 

[Holly3278]

Perhaps it is too late but maybe they should have just let him work there…?

xxx zundrah xxx

No Zundrah, they should not have just let him work there. This is, of course, assuming that the man was a practicing homosexual. Practicing homosexuals should be nowhere near the altar. If he was a celibate/chaste homosexual, then by all means, let him be an altar server. But if not, he should be nowhere near the altar. That is just my opinion.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Not knowing the situation, it is hard to tell whether Mr. Corcoran’s situation is scandalous or not. I did a quick google and someone mentioned that “Owner Jim Corcoran, and his partner David, are also a big part of the Ste. Anne’s spa experience, mixing hospitality with fun.” If David is the aforementioned roommate and Mr. Corcoran refers to his “roommate” as his “partner,” then this obviously leads one to believe that they are more than a “disinterested friendship.” That is what would cause scandal. It would be the same as a heterosexual man living with a woman whom he calls his “partner.” I would expect a bishop to remove such a person from their role, as well…

This may have been a misunderstanding on the part of the guest and author of that article or the misinterpretation of the reader. The David referred to in the article could very well be David Navia who is the Director of Operations at the spa. Of course, as you’ve pointed out, it could also be his lover. Who knows. In either case, I would hope that the Bishop had sought clarification from Mr. Corcoran and inquired into this matter before capitulating to the accusations and demands of twelve (out of how many?) parishioners. I’ve read other articles about this and, based on the statements of those who sent this letter, those parishoners seem to be using this in a broader battle to have their pastor removed.

 

[estesbob]

I’ve wondered the same thing.
At parishes I’ve attended there were lectors, choir members (& maybe altar servers or EMHCs for all I know) who were living together w/o benefit of marriage or divorced and remarried, which is scandal.

You should apporach your Priest about this and if that does not resolve the problem you should contact your Bishop.

 

[rlg94086]

This may have been a misunderstanding on the part of the guest and author of that article or the misinterpretation of the reader. The David referred to in the article could very well be David Navia who is the Director of Operations at the spa. Of course, as you’ve pointed out,** it could also be his lover.** Who knows. In either case, I would hope that the Bishop had sought clarification from Mr. Corcoran and inquired into this matter before capitulating to the accusations and demands of twelve (out of how many?) parishioners. I’ve read other articles about this and, based on the statements of those who sent this letter, those parishoners seem to be using this in a broader battle to have their pastor removed.

Right. Of course, if he even has a gay “lover” or “partner,” then his situation would bring scandal. The Catechism does mention “disinterested friendship.” This does not include having a “chaste” partnership with someone of the same sex.

I have no idea of the political situation of the twelve parishioners. The number/percentage/motivations have nothing to do with the validity of the complaint. I do agree that the Bishop should seek clarification in these cases. I hope and assume he did.

 

[BobCatholic]

Anti-Catholic bigotry is enshrined in Canadian law.

 

[PrairieMom]

Originally Posted by didymus I’ve wondered the same thing.
At parishes I’ve attended there were lectors, choir members (& maybe altar servers or EMHCs for all I know) who were living together w/o benefit of marriage or divorced and remarried, which is scandal.
You should apporach your Priest about this and if that does not resolve the problem you should contact your Bishop.

I have a similar situation, but the couple in question teaches RCIA. If they go, there will be no one left to teach! What then?

What does Mr. Corcoran hope to accomplish by bringing this complaint? I have to wonder at his motivation.

 

[selylidne]

The real issue, it seems to me, is the independence of the church. There is no right to be an altar server! On the contrary, the bishop had every right to make that decision even if it was a terrible, scandalous decision. He could dismiss anyone or everyone in his diocese from that position with or without good reason. Canadians appear to be more interested in punishing unpopular choices than in the most basic freedom, which is making your own decisions.

 

[Phemie]

If this case runs true to form, the bishop will not even be allowed to use the Bible and Church law as defense - if he’s even allowed to present a defense. These HRTs are kangaroo courts.

 

[averheyen]

I’m discusted to call myself Canadian.