Unmarried Catholic school teacher, fired after pregnancy, will pursue legal action [CC]

[Cider]

It would also set the precedent that homosexual staff members who get married while employed by a Catholic school could not be fired. It would indeed be a very dangerous precedent. There are contract clauses that cannot be enforced, but not being able to enforce this one, would completely invalidate religious freedom and defeat the purpose of religious schools.

I don’t think they are the same. Making possibly a one time slip and having sex outside of marriage isn’t the same as contracting a gay not marriage. Plus we don’t know how she got pregnant. Maybe she was raped? We don’t know. And I think the fact that she could have had an abortion and kept her job but instead chose life should mean something, I think it sets a bad precedent to punish people for one time mistakes if they are repentant.

 

[vames]

This is a similar argument used by those asked to refrain from receiving Eucharist. The teachings of the Catholic Church are intended to aid one’s soul toward salvation. In this case, the teacher may say (a)“I’m proud of the school’s commitment to the kids by having positive role models consistent with Catholic teaching” or (b)“I’ll get them back and seek some type of retribution against them.” We always have a decision to make about how we respond to sanctions.

There is a major difference between losing one’s job while pregnant and not being able to receive the Eucharist. An excommunicated person can repent, go to confession and change his or her life, in order to be able to receive the Eucharist again. The teacher can’t do anything to convince the employer to revoke the punishment, because she can’t turn back time. Repenting, apologizing, going to confession can’t get her job back. No forgiveness here.

I am going to suggest that the content was most likely verified.

I’m not saying the content of the anonymous letter wasn’t verified. I said that it wasn’t the teacher who notified the employer and the community, as in “Hey, look at me, I’m so proud of what I’ve done”. And again, if she files a lawsuit, her intention is to use the current anti-discrimination laws to keep her job, not to obtain a new rule saying “From now on premarital sex has to be proudly allowed in Catholic schools”.

 

[JimG]

Scandal doesn’t mean something shocking. It doesn’t involve a public outcry or outrage. Scandal simply means an action which makes it easier for others to sin. For example, an older brother tells his younger brother that there’s nothing wrong with viewing pornography. He makes light of it. He doesn’t tell the younger brother to do it. But he does it himself, and he sets the example, so the younger brother follows. There’s no shock; there’s no outrage. But the younger brother is thereby encouraged to sin. There are a huge number of similar examples.

Imagine a letter that parents receive from their Catholic school:

Dear parents,

We intend to form your child in the Catholic Faith. That is our mission and we will do our best to ensure that your child is formed in virtue.

You may have heard that one of our coaches is cohabiting with his girlfriend. And that several of our teachers are living with their boyfriends. And we do have a teacher who is gay and married to his partner. And one of our teachers has two children in school but has never been married. That’s all true. Everyone has a personal life, and we have no control over that. Just make sure your child follows what they teach rather than what they do.

 

[josie_L]

Just curious about your use of the term “scandal.” Come on now. Is this really to the level of a scandal? Has it caused public outcry? Also think about this for a moment. Much of what you post is fairly value laden. You assume and allege that this baby, born to a single mom, will grow up in poverty. We really don’t know anything about the circumstances here of the teacher. Maybe she will wed the father soon. Because she is a teacher, I would think she would be marketable to teach and make a decent living (but I will say our teachers need to be paid much more). The dioceses and this Catholic school should be ashamed of themselves for firing this teacher. Your post goes on to make several statements such as: “selfish, physical urges” and the like. Isn’t that being a little judgmental and harsh? You then go on to question her status of an adult. What is most troubling is the statement that in essence the baby will be “born into scandal” (there’s that word again). Would a married teacher who became pregnant be required to approach her employer, or should she approach her employer about being pregnant? You suggest that this teacher should face her school "and accept the consequences of her sin. Not sure I follow you here. Public punishment for being pregnant. What? This is a case of discrimination and injustice pure and simple.

From a logical point of view how is this case purely discriminatory, i.e., she had a contract, therefore, she was aware that by engaging in the activities that she was, she would end up breaking that contract, i.e., it’s her own fault. Having said this, I also believe that the school could have handled the case more compassionately, but it’s a stretch to say that this is discrimination when she herself agreed to follow a certain code of conduct by signing the contract that she did! I mean isn’t honour or keeping one’s promises of any value to anyone anymore? This lawsuit is not correct in my opinion!

P.s There has to be some way to help this teacher in a compassionate fashion but without compromising the faith.

God bless!

 

[saintjohnxxiii]

Reading Ed Peters post was certainly helpful but a few points we should all consider. We here on this thread know very little about this situation. The article in the OP is a paragraph and goes into no details about the circumstances surrounding this.

I hope for the school’s sake that they investigated this thoroughly as if it comes out she is pregnant due to rape then the School is going to be taken rightly to the cleaners. For all we know this teacher may have said that she has no intention of getting married to the father and thinks that single parenthood is a noble and worthwhile endeavor. Or perhaps she initiated all this by coming up front.

We also have to consider Pope Francis in all of this as well. Recently he baptized a baby who’s parents aren’t married (yet). Those actions are relevant to this because it seems to indicate a shift somewhat with how Catholic schools should conduct themselves.

 

[Burt_Macklin]

Scandal doesn’t mean something shocking. It doesn’t involve a public outcry or outrage. Scandal simply means an action which makes it easier for others to sin. For example, an older brother tells his younger brother that there’s nothing wrong with viewing pornography. He makes light of it. He doesn’t tell the younger brother to do it. But he does it himself, and he sets the example, so the younger brother follows. There’s no shock; there’s no outrage. But the younger brother is thereby encouraged to sin. There are a huge number of similar examples.

Imagine a letter that parents receive from their Catholic school:

Dear parents,

We intend to form your child in the Catholic Faith. That is our mission and we will do our best to ensure that your child is formed in virtue.

You may have heard that one of our coaches is cohabiting with his girlfriend. And that several of our teachers are living with their boyfriends. And we do have a teacher who is gay and married to his partner. And one of our teachers has two children in school but has never been married. That’s all true. Everyone has a personal life, and we have no control over that. Just make sure your child follows what they teach rather than what they do.

… And we also wish to inform you the Mrs Evenson is obstinately pregnant. *

Going by your own definition of scandal pregnancy just doesn’t qualify. She isn’t going out telling students that pre-marital sex is a-okay in her mind, doesn’t matter what the church teaches. She is simply pregnant, not making any statement at all.

 

[Spanish_Donkey]

What about the children in the school?

I understand that a middle school is a school for students in their early teens. So, those are the people who are in danger of being “scandalized”. What’s the frame of mind of a teenager? They are accused of being selfish and egotistic, but in fact they are quite prone to idealism. They may look up to Mother Teresa of Calcutta, Lenin or a group of bearded jihadists, but they don’t want their beliefs watered-down, diluted. They can put up with many things, but they can’t stand hypocrisy. And they already know that there’s such a thing as sex outside of marriage. There’s Internet, there’s MTV, there’s Hollywood… and there are some of the best works of world literature. There’s even the Bible.

So, what may these teenagers think now?

a. “Miss …. is pregnant and she’s not married!!! How horrible of her! I’m so glad that the school has decided to fire her. But being a good Catholic girl/boy, I will pray for her soul. There’s no much chance of her avoiding eternal punishment, but who knows?”

b. “Miss … is pregnant and that bunch of hypocrites who hide better their sins have chased her out of the school as if she were some filthy animal. With the complacent approval of that bunch of eunuchs who have always the words “mercy”, “forgiveness” and “charity” on their lips. And the mums and dads with the pro-life bumper stickers on their SUVs. What a joke. Shame on them all.”

I bet that the thoughts of most of them will be closer to b than to a.

 

[Spanish_Donkey]

Even a venial sin is an infinite offence against God, who is all Good. But there are sins and sins. In the Gospel, Our Lord treats quite mildly the women that have committed sins of the flesh: the woman taken in adultery (John 8, 1-11); the woman that washed His feet with ointment (if she is not the same one) (Luke 7, 36-50); the Samaritan woman (John 4, 6-42). “Neither will I condemn thee. Go, and now sin no more.” “Wherefore I say to thee: Many sins are forgiven her, because she hath loved much. But to whom less is forgiven, he loveth less. And he said to her: Thy sins are forgiven thee.” “Now of that city many of the Samaritans believed in him, for the word of the woman giving testimony: He told me all things whatsoever I have done. So when the Samaritans were come to him, they desired that he would tarry there. And he abode there two days.”

On the other hand, Our Lord thunders against Pharisees (Matthew 23, 1-33). “But woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you shut the kingdom of heaven against men, for you yourselves do not enter in; and those that are going in, you suffer not to enter.” “Blind guides, who strain out a gnat, and swallow a camel.” “Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you are like to whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear to men beautiful, but within are full of dead men’ s bones, and of all filthiness. So you also outwardly indeed appear to men just; but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.” “You serpents, generation of vipers, how will you flee from the judgment of hell?”
We can reasonably infer that phariseism is something much worse than the sins of the flesh.

Oscar Wilde said once that the Catholic Church “is for saints and sinners alone- for respectable people, the Anglican Church will do.” But there seems to be many respectable people among the Catholic in the US. Or many Simons the Leper.

 

[MomaMary8]

Just curious about your use of the term “scandal.” Come on now. Is this really to the level of a scandal? Has it caused public outcry? Also think about this for a moment.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC)

2284 Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. the person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor’s tempter. He damages virtue and integrity; he may even draw his brother into spiritual death. Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense.

Much of what you post is fairly value laden.

Thank you. I do hope my Catholic values are lived and spoken well enough that it obvious where my thoughts are. May God always be in my heart, but as a sinner I know I struggle to keep him there.

You assume and allege that this baby, born to a single mom, will grow up in poverty. We really don’t know anything about the circumstances here of the teacher. Maybe she will wed the father soon. Because she is a teacher, I would think she would be marketable to teach and make a decent living (but I will say our teachers need to be paid much more).

Single parenthood is one of the biggest factors in poverty.
womenintheworld.org/stories/entry/the-face-of-american-poverty-today
thenation.com/blog/171886/week-poverty-us-single-mothers-worst
singlemotherguide.com/single-mother-statistics/
(from this article:

• Single mothers are more likely to be poor than married couples. The poverty rate for single-mother families in 2011 was 40.9%, nearly five times more than the rate (8.8%) for married-couple families.*)

These are just a few articles. Marriage and then children is a more recommended path to stability.

The dioceses and this Catholic school should be ashamed of themselves for firing this teacher. Your post goes on to make several statements such as: “selfish, physical urges” and the like. Isn’t that being a little judgmental and harsh?

Yes. Sinning is a very self-centered act. It is definitely not an act that has God and His teachings in mind. The person is putting them self before God when acting in a sinful way. Don’t you agree?

You then go on to question her status of an adult. What is most troubling is the statement that in essence the baby will be “born into scandal” (there’s that word again). Would a married teacher who became pregnant be required to approach her employer, or should she approach her employer about being pregnant? You suggest that this teacher should face her school "and accept the consequences of her sin. Not sure I follow you here. Public punishment for being pregnant. What? This is a case of discrimination and injustice pure and simple.

Please re-read the quote from the catechism in regard to the term scandal. All of us know if we have done right or wrong (or at least those of us who have been properly catechized.) Just as a mother teachers her young child to return the piece of gum he snatched at the counter, this adult should be open about the possible scandal she/he may be giving to students and should have come to her employer first.

Like I said, this is very sad. Sinful behavior usually does not have positive consequences. Sometimes the fallout is quickly seen, sometimes it takes years to see the impact. We are seeing quite a lot of negative actions and words just from one night of sin…very sad.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Respected canonist Dr. Ed Peters weighed in on this, and has not come down so favorably on the school’s side.

I agree that this is not a clear-cut case as would be with some of the others such as teachers entering a homosexual “marriage”. This is the case of one sin in the woman’s past making trouble for her. She is not necessarily an obstinate, persistent sinner. The school may know different, but I see no reason to pass judgement on her based on the information
we have now.

I agree with the canon lawyer. Thanks for posting it.

 

[JimG]

Yes, the canon lawyer makes a nuanced and not yet conclusive case (because all the facts are not known.)

It seems to come down to whether the teacher in question perceives her situation as an example to be emulated or an example to be avoided. In either case, it seems it would be difficult to make the practical distinction to her students, who will be inclined to look upon her actions favorably if they see her as a good teacher.

 

[gilliam]

Yes, the canon lawyer makes a nuanced and not yet conclusive case (because all the facts are not known.)

It seems to come down to whether the teacher in question perceives her situation as an example to be emulated or an example to be avoided. In either case, it seems it would be difficult to make the practical distinction to her students, who will be inclined to look upon her actions favorably if they see her as a good teacher.

I agree with Jim here. Do as I say, not as I do, doesn’t work with teenagers.

 

[Just_Lurking]

Matthew 18:21-22 says:
Then Peter approaching asked him, “Lord, if my brother sins against me, how often must I forgive him? As many as seven times?” Jesus answered, “I say to you, not seven times but seventy-seven times.
The concept of “scandal” isn’t a problem here. It’s the idea that forgiveness itself can be a source of scandal, which is completely wrong.

 

[Sarabande]

While I do truly feel for this woman who is now an unemployed pregnant mother, I also understand the school’s position. She signed a contract. When you sign contracts, you are supposed to read them, and by signing it says that you understand all of what it entails, including any ramifications and consequences should you do anything that breaks that contract.

I have had clients who have tried to break their contracts without the consequences for breaking them. People don’t want to be legally bound by these contracts, but still sign them anyway and then get upset when you hold them to those promises. I used to trust in the word of people for my church work when they agreed to book me, only to be burned so many times because people today don’t put any value on a verbal or written promise. I now use contracts for everything and everyone.

There are reasons for contracts. For the school, part of it is to protect and keep the moral integrity of Catholic teaching that is being taught and displayed for their students.

According to this report, it turns out someone wrote an anonymous letter to the school about the teacher’s pregnancy.

missoulian.com/news/local/unwed-butte-catholic-school-teacher-fired-over-pregnancy/article_94ad36f8-8dda-11e3-b82b-0019bb2963f4.html

I think the teacher should have had the chance to bring this up to the school before an anonymous letter was sent. I wonder if the school could have worked with the teacher. Perhaps put her on unpaid leave until she gave birth and had her maternity leave, then bring her back if she was truly sorry for what she did. This could even prove to be a teaching moment for her students, if the school so-desired, about sin, repentance, consequences and forgiveness - the consequence being put on leave. I don’t know, there are so many factors and we don’t know all of the information.

But… as it stands, I really don’t like the idea of a court challenging contracts. What good would contracts be if all you have to do is just take it to court so that you don’t have to abide by something you voluntarily chose to sign?

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

With regard to the cited article, there is a difference between repentance and non-repentance. If the woman was pregnant AND made it public what she did was wrong and went to confession, I do not think the school should fire her. But in this case she is suing the school; not exactly the actions of a repentant person.

 

[josie_L]

While I do truly feel for this woman who is now an unemployed pregnant mother, I also understand the school’s position. She signed a contract. When you sign contracts, you are supposed to read them, and by signing it says that you understand all of what it entails, including any ramifications and consequences should you do anything that breaks that contract.

I have had clients who have tried to break their contracts without the consequences for breaking them. People don’t want to be legally bound by these contracts, but still sign them anyway and then get upset when you hold them to those promises. I used to trust in the word of people for my church work when they agreed to book me, only to be burned so many times because people today don’t put any value on a verbal or written promise. I now use contracts for everything and everyone.

There are reasons for contracts. For the school, part of it is to protect and keep the moral integrity of Catholic teaching that is being taught and displayed for their students.

According to this report, it turns out someone wrote an anonymous letter to the school about the teacher’s pregnancy.

missoulian.com/news/local/unwed-butte-catholic-school-teacher-fired-over-pregnancy/article_94ad36f8-8dda-11e3-b82b-0019bb2963f4.html

I think the teacher should have had the chance to bring this up to the school before an anonymous letter was sent. I wonder if the school could have worked with the teacher. Perhaps put her on unpaid leave until she gave birth and had her maternity leave, then bring her back if she was truly sorry for what she did. This could even prove to be a teaching moment for her students, if the school so-desired, about sin, repentance, consequences and forgiveness - the consequence being put on leave. I don’t know, there are so many factors and we don’t know all of the information.

But… as it stands, I really don’t like the idea of a court challenging contracts. What good would contracts be if all you have to do is just take it to court so that you don’t have to abide by something you voluntarily chose to sign?

This is exactly how I feel!

 

[manualman]

What it comes down to is that from the article, we don’t have the facts to decide.

If a single teacher made a mistake, found out she was pregnant, went to the principal and honestly admitted the mistake, expressed horror at the terrible example set for students and earnestly wanted to find a way to make it right, I’d be pretty angry with a principal who simply tossed her out on her ear (and a Scarlet Letter attached). I don’t see Jesus doing that.

On the other hand, if the teacher in question got pregnant by accident, decided it was nobody’s business and didn’t say anything until people noticed the bump and then responded by telling the principal to ‘shove off and mind your own business’ then I’d fully support the school in firing her.

To me scandal is less about the fact that people commit sin and more about the fact that people sin and aren’t repentant about it (or even acknowledging it as sin!). I don’t see that those facts are in evidence here.

There’s another case in Indiana where a school fired a teacher for (publicly and proudly) using IVF to get pregnant who also got fired. She’s obstinately set in her opinion that she did nothing wrong and feels the church has no right to fire her from her catholic school teaching job. THAT case is absurd and needs prompt tossing out. Someone proud of their sin is, by definition, unfit to be a teacher in the faith (the whole point of a catholic school). Someone repentant for their sins is called a Christian!

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

I’m not so in favor of this as

• Pregnancy is not necessarily indicative of a pattern, it only takes one instance
• It encourages abortion so that it isn’t found out about (which I think is far graver than fornication)
• In cases where it is fuzzy whether it was consensual involved (memory hazy or no existent) it can encourage rape accusation which may or may not be true
• If the teacher is widely respected then there can be outrage by students that she was fired for not getting an abortion and pretending she didn’t
• It could be a result of rape, but she doesn’t come forward because she knows her attacker (most of the time they do) and either was threatened with violence or knows that an accusation could completely destroy his life and she doesn’t want to do that (think date rape or by a boyfriend)

 

[raikou]

You know, I would agree that firing teachers who get pregnant out of wedlock might not really be pro-life. The mother needs a job now more than any other time.

I agree that the scandal should be addressed, but the Catholic school might mercifully address this by requiring the teacher to issue a public apology for the fault committed instead.

If the teacher continues to be a scandal by a rebellious attitude and even stands by the fault committed, then I guess the school may fire her not because she is pregnant but because of persistent bad moral example.

 

[FollowChrist34]

You cannot have it both ways. Homosexual activists keep telling the Church that we don’t treat others who commit sexual sins the same as homosexual sins. We say yes we do, those who violate the morality clauses suffer the consequence spelled out in the contract. The school must fire her, if they want to preserve the right to fire others who violate the morality clause including homosexual’s who attempt “marriages.” Or those in invalid marriages, or those who pass out condoms or advocate the use of contraception.

Those of you throwing out Bible verses, remember that Jesus also said: “If anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him if a large millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.” Mark 9:42.

Agreed. If the school overlooks this, what do we say to homosexual activists? It’s a double standard. Also, I’m female, Catholic. If I were a teacher in a Catholic school, single and became pregnant, I would immediately recognize the gravity of my sin and the horrible situation I had placed myself and my employer in. I would understand what an irresponsible image I presented to the schoolchildren and be embarrassed by it. I’d probably quit out of shame and get another job. I would expect nothing less than to be fired As a serious Christian, I would focus on penance, putting my life back together and providing for my kid. I wouldn’t sue the school and soak up the publicity.