Priest accused of causing "mental conflict" by preaching Catholic doctrine; gay...

[Defensor Christi]

My guess is that the SCOTUS is going to take the easy way out and not rule on the issue.

Jim

I think that is best case scenerio at this point...

 

[Sarcalogos Deus]

I think that is best case scenerio at this point...

Weirdly if DOMA is struck down it may be a victory as well as a defeat. Kennedy will be the vote that determines that case, and from what I've read of his comments during the hearings the only way he would consider striking it down is an overreach of Federal power, essentially a states' rights issue.

Despite gay-marriage advocates trying to cast this as a civil rights issue I don't see the Court considering it in that light. What we'll end up having is a final definitive ruling that there is no constitutional right to marriage, and the issue will become solely a legislative one.

 

[ebia]

Often chaplain services are not funded entirely by universities - it is often a joint effort between the university and the religious group. So the diocese may pay the salary while the university provides the space to work, for example.

Typically universities fund all kinds of chaplaincies, because they are a real service to students and students want them there. The idea that because something is publicly funded somehow means that there is no spiritual component to it is kind of hard to imagine for me.

In the same way, hospitals provide chaplains, maybe contributing to salary but very often giving the individuals space to work, having a chapel, and so on.

I really cant see how it would be any kind of improvement in university life (or in hospitals, or prisons) to say that they cannot have spiritual care because they get public funds. Those services are very heavily used, including by those who are not part of religious communities.

Yes. However the university or whatever will reasonably set guidelines on what it expects from such chaplains.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I think that is best case scenerio at this point...

Except that it will let stand the lower court ruling that DOMA and the California Amendments are unconstitutional.

By the time we see the negative effects of gay marriage on society, it will be too late to turn back. The concept of what a true marriage is, will have been lost for generations and no laws will be able to undo the damage.


Jim

 

[Defensor Christi]

Weirdly if DOMA is struck down it may be a victory as well as a defeat. Kennedy will be the vote that determines that case, and from what I've read of his comments during the hearings the only way he would consider striking it down is an overreach of Federal power, essentially a states' rights issue.

Despite gay-marriage advocates trying to cast this as a civil rights issue I don't see the Court considering it in that light. What we'll end up having is a final definitive ruling that there is no constitutional right to marriage, and the issue will become solely a legislative one.

Except that it will let stand the lower court ruling that DOMA and the California Amendments are unconstitutional.

By the time we see the negative effects of gay marriage on society, it will be too late to turn back. The concept of what a true marriage is, will have been lost for generations and no laws will be able to undo the damage.


Jim

Both valid points...the law is not my strength...thanks for the education!

 

[KatherineS]

My guess is that the SCOTUS is going to take the easy way out and not rule on the issue.

Jim

The major reason the SCOTUS will not rule is that there is no court case here that would not be laughed out of court.

Both the priest and the students have their free speech rights. No American court is going to restrict either party from saying what they have said.

The University has the right to decide to do with its own property. If they want to stop funding the Newman Center or not allow others to use GWU's intellectual property (i.e. use of its name), no Court will stop them.

And the Archdiocese can do whatever it wants at St. Stephen's parish including assignment of priests. No Court will stop them.

There really are not any debatable legal issues here.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

KatherineS

The major reason the SCOTUS will not rule is that there is no court case here that would not be laughed out of court.

I was referring to the current case before the SCOTUS which they just heard the arguments on, and we're waiting their decision.

Both the priest and the students have their free speech rights. No American court is going to restrict either party from saying what they have said.

Law suits restrict free-speech all the time. If the two students bring a law suit toward the University, the ACLU will be happy to represent them, the University either have to pay the huge cost of defending the priest, or forcing him to leave if he refuses.

A similar case happened when Allen Dershowitz wanted revenge against Prof Norm Finkelstein for exposing plagiarism in Desrhowitz's book. When DePaul U. was going to give Finkelstein tenure, Dershowitz sued. He probably knew he'd lose, but the University had the choice of fighting an expensive court battle, or refusing Finkelstein's tenure. Finkelstein, being the bigger of the two, asked the University not to give him tenure.

The University has the right to decide to do with its own property. If they want to stop funding the Newman Center or not allow others to use GWU's intellectual property (i.e. use of its name), no Court will stop them.

They have the right, but lawsuits often infringe on rights as shown above.

Jim

 

[Decanus]

Just to clear something up, I am a Gay man, and I do not agree with the actions these students have taken. I am a firm believer in anybodies free speech. Never in human history has anybody agreed with anybody 100% on anything and we have got along okay.

These gay students do not speak for us all. I feel sorry for this Priest and utterly horrified at the students actions.

When people have preached to me about homosexuality, yes it upset and hurt me, but I didn't try to get revenge on them. You just have to accept that some people believe differently to you and move on.

If they want people and religions to respect us more, they certainly are not going the right way about it.

 

[KatherineS]

Law suits restrict free-speech all the time. If the two students bring a law suit toward the University, the ACLU will be happy to represent them, the University either have to pay the huge cost of defending the priest, or forcing him to leave if he refuses.

They have the right, but lawsuits often infringe on rights as shown above.

Jim

No one has said they are suing over anything. Two sides have spoken. The students are not suing but asking the University to take certain actions. The University has the right to decide either way, but I expect they will leave things as they are.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

No one has said they are suing over anything. Two sides have spoken. The students are not suing but asking the University to take certain actions. The University has the right to decide either way, but I expect they will leave things as they are.

And I didn't say they were suing, but they could and my guess is, they will, especially if a trial lawyer shows them how they can get their way, while making potential $$$ along the way.

Jim

 

[mark46]

I agree, However if a chaplain is to be a chaplain for the entire campus, then he must be sensitive to those of all religions and sensitive to the many social issues of the day. For example, I don't think the reported behavior of the priest would have been considered acceptable by a military chaplain.

Often chaplain services are not funded entirely by universities - it is often a joint effort between the university and the religious group. So the diocese may pay the salary while the university provides the space to work, for example.


Typically universities fund all kinds of chaplaincies, because they are a real service to students and students want them there. The idea that because something is publicly funded somehow means that there is no spiritual component to it is kind of hard to imagine for me.

In the same way, hospitals provide chaplains, maybe contributing to salary but very often giving the individuals space to work, having a chapel, and so on.

I really cant see how it would be any kind of improvement in university life (or in hospitals, or prisons) to say that they cannot have spiritual care because they get public funds. Those services are very heavily used, including by those who are not part of religious communities.

 

[MKJ]

I agree, However if a chaplain is to be a chaplain for the entire campus, then he must be sensitive to those of all religions and sensitive to the many social issues of the day. For example, I don't think the reported behavior of the priest would have been considered acceptable by a military chaplain.

It would depend. He was counseling a Catholic student, one who was involved enough to be considering the priesthood. What he would say to a student like that might be quite different than what he would say to someone else who approached him for guidance.

 

[ebia]

It would depend. He was counseling a Catholic student, one who was involved enough to be considering the priesthood. What he would say to a student like that might be quite different than what he would say to someone else who approached him for guidance.

Even in that context he might need to separate roles. The context may need him to inform the student about the Catholic Church's criteria for priesthood while keeping a distance from commenting on the homosexuality himself. Or to refer the student to another priest who is not a chaplain for advice on vocation.

 

[Gwendolyn]

Even in that context he might need to separate roles. The context may need him to inform the student about the Catholic Church's criteria for priesthood while keeping a distance from commenting on the homosexuality himself. Or to refer the student to another priest who is not a chaplain for advice on vocation.

I agree, excepting the last sentence.

If a Catholic seeks advice about a vocation, he/she needs to speak with a priest in addition to a monk/nun depending on the calling. They are the only people who can offer the Catholic advice of any substance regarding what such a vocation would entail. Going to someone else won't change the fact that homosexual activity is sinful.

 

[ebia]

I agree, excepting the last sentence.

If a Catholic seeks advice about a vocation, he/she needs to speak with a priest in addition to a monk/nun depending on the calling. They are the only people who can offer the Catholic advice of any substance regarding what such a vocation would entail. Going to someone else won't change the fact that homosexual activity is sinful.

He's going to get the same information from another priest, but it separates the Chaplain's pastoral role from the giving of that information.

 

[Michie]

Archdiocese, George Washington Students Rush to Chaplain’s Defense

The Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., states that ‘priests have a commitment to educate people in the truths of our faith, regardless of the current cultural trend.’

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-new...shington-students-rush-to-chaplains-defense1/

 

[Michie]

I think what is being forgotten in this conversation is that these kids are also complaining about Catholic belief concerning abortion.

 

[KatherineS]

I think what is being forgotten in this conversation is that these kids are also complaining about Catholic belief concerning abortion.

It is not forgotten. There are tons of kids who are pro-choice. Mistaken as they may be, they still have free speech rights.

 

[Michie]

It is not forgotten. There are tons of kids who are pro-choice. Mistaken as they may be, they still have free speech rights.

Something these students forget.
The priest is doing his job. He has free speech as well.

He seems to be doing a good job.

From the last article I posted:

Meanwhile, Chris Crawford, 21, a junior at GW and the director of pro-life ministry at the Newman Center has established a blog with testimonials from a growing number of students who have endorsed Father Shaffer as a loving, effective and open-minded university chaplain.

During an April 4 interview with Register senior editor Joan Frawley Desmond, Crawford rejected the negative characterization of Father Shaffer and explained why students like him have returned to the faith with the priest’s encouragement.

Read more: Archdiocese, George Washington Students Rush to Chaplain’s Defense | Daily News | NCRegister.com

 

[ebia]

Archdiocese, George Washington Students Rush to Chaplain’s Defense

The Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., states that ‘priests have a commitment to educate people in the truths of our faith, regardless of the current cultural trend.’

Maybe, but that may not always be compatible with the role of of chaplain