As a result of the passage of gay marriage by the District of Columbia, the Roman Catholic Archdiocese has felt it necessary to put an end to its foster care program. The rationale is that once gays start marrying in the District, the church will be forced to place children in same sex households for foster care. This is certainly the church’s prerogative, and a reflection of its conviction that its moral principles may not be compromised in order to work with the state. In response, the Rev. Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State takes the archdiocese to task, essentially arguing that the Catholic Church should be more like his own United Church of Christ:
“If ‘faith-based’ charities cannot or will not obey civil rights laws, they ought not benefit from public funds,” he said.
“I am amazed that church officials would threaten to stop helping the disadvantaged because they are being asked to treat all citizens of the District fairly,” he continued. “They seem to have lost all perspective. How strong is their commitment to helping the poor if they’re willing to take this hard-line stance?
“If Catholic Charities drops its participation in publicly funded social services,” Lynn concluded, “I am confident that other charities would be happy to pick up the slack.” [Emphasis added.]
Imagine–how dare the Catholic Church presume to tell the state that it will not do its moral bidding?! Takes a lot of nerve to refuse to cave in when the state demands that you bow to its particular morality.
One can’t help but be amused by Lynn’s sneer at the Catholic “commitment to helping the poor.” There is no non-governmental organization, whether religious or secular, that does more for the poor in this country than the Catholic Church. I have no doubt that the Archdiocese of Washington wlll find other ways of serving the needy children in the District that do not involve compromising its moral message. In doing so it will put to shame the mainline denominations in their willingness to jettison their theological, evangelistic, and moral message in order to seek (typically without success) a measure of political influence.
Lynn’s absurd insistence that Catholics need to be more like liberal Protestant reminds me of a song:
February 19, 2010 at 12:10 am
I thought the Roman Catholic Archdiocese had a foster care program in response to the commands of Jesus Christ to care for the widows and orphans, the homeless, the naked and the hungry. Something to do with living out the Gospel. Something they would do even upon penalty of prison or risk of death.
My mistake.
February 19, 2010 at 5:42 am
Jodie –
You act as if there’s only one way to care for the widows and the orphans. The RC has every right to choose the way in which it provides services, especially when they feel that if they were forced to follow guidelines set by the state, they would actually not be aiding but compromising the gospel.
February 19, 2010 at 12:38 pm
“forced to follow guidelines set by the state”
You mean like child molestation “guidelines” and turning over pedophile priests to be tried in civil court?
The Roman Catholic Church has never stopped doing something because of pressure by the state. It’s preposterous to suggest that gay marriage laws would factor in the least on how they run their foster care programs.
That’s just nonsense.
February 19, 2010 at 12:48 pm
Strangely, the District of Columbia voters haven’t had a referendum opportunity regarding gay marriage.
Hmmm, I wonder why that might be…
February 19, 2010 at 1:01 pm
Why is it that some people, when the subject of the Catholic Church comes up, can’t help but start gibbering about pedophilia and child molestation, no matter how irrelevant? Maybe because they have nothing coherent to say…or perhaps because anti-Catholicism is the one prejudice that’s still acceptable on the left.
February 19, 2010 at 3:12 pm
While I have my own (as has been noted) “hyper-Protestant” views of the RCC I applaud them for not allowing the civil magistrate to dictate policy to them. However it is ironic the position the RCC finds itself in.
It sure is a far cry from Gregory VII and Henry IV.
February 20, 2010 at 1:41 am
Dear Rev Fischler,
Now why do you feel the need to insult me?
What I said was far from being incoherent gibbering. I just find it not likely, not credible and probably just not true that a Roman Catholic Archdiocese would give a damn what the state defines as marriage.
a) because according to the RCC you aren’t even married unless you are married in the RCC. It is RCC doctrine that Protestants such as us are living in sin just the same as gay couples. So what if it’s gay marriage or straight?
b) because the RCC does in fact ignore state law and protect its own if they feel so inclined, even in the absurd case of pedophilia and child molestation. So no, they will do what they will do without regard to state law. If they want to run a foster care service they will, no matter what.
c) because an RCC sanctioned foster care service would not place children outside an RCC marriage in the first place, and since the RCC does not perform gay marriage, the question of placing children with a gay couple would never come up.
So whoever is saying that they are terminating such service on account of gay marriage is full of baloney. They don’t know what they are talking about and they are doing the RCC a disservice by spreading such malicious gossip.
If the only answer you have for me is to try to insult me, it is not me that you insult, but the cloth you wear.
February 20, 2010 at 12:20 pm
Jodie –
The problem is this…
A is simply wrong. In the RCC, a first marriage amongst Protestants is considered valid and, to them at least, sacramental. The catechism of the Catholic church states that baptized Protestants “are put in a certain, although imperfect, union with the Catholic church.”
B is a claim that the RCC has in its entirety attempted to cover up the pedophilia in its borders. It’s rather like a 50-Hitler Stop…once you bring it up for comparison, no matter what you do, the conversation is over. The RCC has made incredible, foul mistakes in this area and should be held to account. That said, in the vast majority of situations the RCC has seen itself as bound by local law and complies with it. To judge the entirety of the church on its biggest fault alone isn’t fair.
C is false because many RCC services do place children in Protestant homes. Again, this is simple to verify, and it follows because of the original logic — the RCC couldn’t not place children with Protestant families under law.
Jodie, you may have felt insulted by David, but your wild and unsubstantiated allegations are the real issue.
February 20, 2010 at 1:12 pm
Well put, Jason. I was about to answer when I saw that you had already. All that’s missing is the adventures of Maria Monk.
Jodie, your reputation precedes you. I’ve seen you insult, demean, smear, and spread falsehood on other blogs. Viola Larson, a sweet soul who is far more patient than I am, finally had to ask you to stop commenting “Naming His Grace,” so bad was it. I banned you once before, so you just used a different IP address. I gave you a brief second chance. You immediately start peddling falsehoods, this time in an anti-Catholic vein. So guess what? You’re banned again.