Worrying news from Connecticut
I see I’m not the only one who wonders this — John C. Wright is similarly curious. We were both, evidently, under the impression that the Constitution of the United States read, in its First Amendment, thusly:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Not being an American myself, I cannot speak to what life is truly like under an application of this principle. Outside observer that I am, though, I cannot see how what is currently going on in the state of Connecticut can possibly be considered permissible under the above; it would seem to be the case that the bill currently before the Connecticut state judiciary committee violates — grievously — the ideal which I have bolded, above.
The bill revises and changes the financial relationship between a bishop and a pastor and the lay members of a local parish. Connecticut Catholics are mobilizing to fight it. And in the process, they will be fighting fellow Catholics who have brought the bill forward in the name of fiscal responsibility and transparency.
The proposed state legislation, Bill 1098, changes the way a parish church does business. It is still early in the process of becoming a law, and it likely will not pass muster constitutionally, but it is worrisome, nonetheless. Let’s review what’s at stake.
The current corporation laws state that a church has five people who make up its religious corporation: the bishop, the pastor, a parochial vicar and two parish trustees. Bill 1078 would do away with this structure, and replace it with a group of elected board members who make the financial decisions in each parish. In this new scenario, the bishop and the pastor have no votes in the local church’s financial matters. They are ex-officio members of the board. And, yes, this means the pastor has to report to the board on all financial matters.
The statement from the Diocese of Bridgeport describes it this way:
This bill violates the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. It forces a radical reorganization of the legal, financial, and administrative structure of our parishes. This is contrary to the Apostolic nature of the Catholic Church because it disconnects parishes from their Pastors and their Bishop. Parishes would be run by boards from which Pastors and the Bishop would be effectively excluded…
The State has no right to interfere in the internal affairs and structure of the Catholic Church. This bill is directed only at the Catholic Church but could someday be forced on other denominations. The State has no business controlling religion.
Wright links to a blog post that puts it a bit more plainly:
The Judiciary Committee of the Connecticut General Assembly is considering outrageous legislation designed specifically to target Catholic parishes with the bogus aim of “restructuring” them for the public good. Senate Bill 1098 is a frontal assault on the autonomy of the Roman Catholic Church in Connecticut. Among other things, it would force parishes to set up “lay boards” to oversee the management of Church-owned property, cutting priests and the Archbishop out of the process altogether. The legislation is scheduled for a public hearing on Wednesday, March 11th, at 12:00 noon, in Room 2C of the Legislative Office Building in Hartford. Please tell all your friends to attend and lodge an impassioned protest.
It’s the fact that the bill pertains specifically and only to the Catholic Church, and that it proposes to dictate — legislatively — the way in which the Church in that state is managed, that constitutes the specific violation of the First Amendment.
The bill itself has been introduced by Senator Andrew McDonald of Stamford and Rep. Michael Lawlor of East Haven. Both men “are…homosexual activists, who have opposed the local Church’s efforts to defend marriage between a man and a woman.” Which makes this attempt into something more than just a fiscal power-grab; it smacks also of revenge.
Predictably, news coverage external to Catholic sources has been somewhat lacking — stuff that happens to Catholics usually gets a “no, never mind,” from the media. From those Catholic sources, though, several insights have emerged.
I particularly like Peter Sean Bradley’s take on the matter:
The Connecticut state legislature is taking a page out of the playbook of historical enemies of the Catholic Church, including the French Revolution, Napoleon, the Communist Chinese and others. It is attempting to “democratize” the Catholic Church, and weaken the authority of Bishops, by requiring that parish matters be controlled by a board of lay people, with the bishop being reduced to a non-voting ex officio member.
In other words, the Connecticut legislature wants the Catholic Church to be more Protestant.
Yea, that will work.
He ends by wondering at how far away the collapse of “the social compact” can be when government proposes — without much opposition, apart from that raised by the targeted group — can be if a state can make such a bald-faced attempt at re-shaping the Catholic Church within its borders from a diocesan administrative model to a congregational one.
The comparison he makes — “the Connecticut legislature wants the Catholic Church to be more Protestant” — is particularly apt, and illustrates yet again just how the bill violates the First Amendment; the changes it proposes to mandate legislatively would be entirely antithetical to the extant administrative structure of the Church at the diocesan level, which arrangement simply mirrors the administrative structure of the Church as a whole.
From Catholic Exchange (linked previously):
I can understand what Catholics in Connecticut felt when, in recent years, a priest was charge with embezzling over a million dollars from his local parish to finance his personal life. He was convicted of the crime and is now serving time behind bars. It is said that embezzlements of this kind are the reason behind the legislation proposed in Connecticut. But moving to enact state legislation is not the answer to the problem of fiscal malfeasance.
…
The reason we must watch what happens in Connecticut is that this financial tactic is the latest front in the war to silence the Church on public affairs. First, by trying to change the fiscal structure and take the church hierarchy out of the local parish. Second, by having well-meaning Catholics fight each other on this issue. Third, by trying to distract the Church from the task at hand: the proclamation of the Gospel to the world.
There is also a fourth reason: if the Church can be made to be more beholden to Caesar, then the Church will start having to act more in line with the whims of Caesar, lest it face severe financial peril and repercussions. While not exactly a “state church” situation, the results would be little different in practice.
Which brings us back to that pesky First Amendment. Its purpose, incidentally, was to specifically prohibit the establishment of “state churches” which would serve as mouthpieces for the whims of the ruling class/government — the desire of the framers of the Constitution was to prevent something from happening in the U.S. akin to what happened in Britain with the establishment of the Church of England.
That’s not quite what would happen in Connecticut should this legislation be passed and implemented. But it would, I suspect, come close, in that it would rein in the Catholic Church and its ability to comment on social and moral matters. And the model could easily be applied to other religious groups.
Whither the First Amendment and its champions then? Or are they too busy ensuring that public displays of the Ten Commandments are appropriately occluded during hours when the vast majority of the public might otherwise have a chance to observe them? Are they too busy fighting against roadside cross memorials?
Powered by ScribeFire.
Steynian 334 « Free Canuckistan! (March 12, 2009, 3:39 pm).
[...] CONNECTICUT Democrats introduce bill to re-organize Catholic church hierarchy; Worrying news from Connecticut …. (winteryknight, [...]