D.C. Archdiocese Threatens to Axe Social Service Programs over Same-Sex "Marriage"..

The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. has said it will be forced to end its government contracts for social services in the nation's capital, if the D.C. Council does not broaden a religious exemption in a bill to legalize same-sex "marriage." Without the exemption, says the archdiocese, the Church would be required to do such things as extend marriage benefits to same-sex couples, in violation of its core teachings.

The bill under consideration by the district council would legalize same-sex "marriage," but it has a narrow provision that states religious groups would not have to perform same-sex "marriages" or provide their facilities as venues for the novel nuptials.

An earlier version of the bill exempted religious groups from "the promotion of marriage that is in violation of the entity's religious beliefs." However the current legislation whittles down that exemption to just the "promotion of marriage through religious programs, counseling, courses, or retreats," making religious groups and individuals far more subject to persecution via anti-discrimination lawsuits for holding fast to their consciences.

The archdiocese has strongly objected to the legislation, insisting that in all other cases the legislation would put "religious organizations and individuals at risk for adhering to the teachings of their faith."

In areas not exempted by law, individuals and religious organizations will have to obey D.C. laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, which will then include "married" same-sex couples. This could mean that individuals - from wedding photographers to caterers - will face charges of unlawful discrimination if they refuse their services to same-sex couples for reasons of conscience.

Religious groups and churches, including the Catholic archdiocese and its affiliates, would also have to open up their services to homosexual couples, including: adoption and foster-care services, spousal benefits for "married" same-sex couples, and church halls requested for non-marriage functions.

Despite the archdiocese's having asked for a broader exemption, the D.C. Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary rejected on Tuesday any amendment to that effect.

That provoked the archdiocese to warn that the D.C. government's relationship with the Catholic Church's social services arm, Catholic Charities, which serves 68,000 city residents every year through 93 social programs carried out by 40 parishes, would be dramatically altered by the legislation if changes were not made.

"It is our concern that the committee's narrowing of the religious exemption language will cause the government to discontinue our long partnership with them and open up the agency to litigation and the use of resources to defend our religious beliefs rather than serve the poor," said Edward Orzechowski, president and CEO of Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington.

The Archdiocese told the Washington Post on Wednesday that failing to broaden conscience protections for religious groups and individuals would force them to cancel its social services contracts with the city. That in turn would affect the tens of thousands of people seeking help with adoption, homeless shelters, and health services.

The Catholic Church in D.C. nevertheless would continue its social ministries that are not contracted with the D.C. government, and therefore would not fall under the district's regulations.

The Washington Postreports that D.C. council members are thus far unmoved. Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3) derided the Archdiocese and its concerns as "somewhat childish." David A. Catania (I-At Large) also told the Post he would rather see the city's relationship with the Church ended before accommodating its demands on conscience protections.

A vote on the D.C. same-sex "marriage" bill is expected sometime in December.

An ecumenical pro-family coalition, Stand4Marriage Coalition D.C., led by Bishop Harry Jackson of Hope Christian Church and fellow black pastors is lobbying, along with the Catholic archdiocese, to put an initiative banning same-sex "marriage" on the ballot for 2010.

Click to expand...

Members of the D.C. City Council have continued to refuse to address the Archdiocese of Washington's concerns that a bill to legalize same-sex "marriage" would injure the poor by forcing Catholic Charities either to support a violation of Catholic teaching or drop government social-service contracts.

"If the city requires this, we can't do it," Susan Gibbs, archdiocesan spokeswoman, toldthe Washington Post. "The city is saying in order to provide social services, you need to be secular. For us, that's really a problem."

As previously reported, the "Religious Freedom and Civil Equality Amendment Act of 2009," which passed committee 4-1 last Tuesday, would require District organizations receiving government money to follow certain regulations regarding same-sex "marriages." Under the currently contemplated law, this would mean that Catholic Charities would be required to work to place children with same-sex "couples" or support same-sex "partners" through spousal benefits. Rather than support something in contradiction with core Catholic teaching, however, Catholic Charities has said it would cancel its social services contracts with the city, although it would continue to provide non city-contracted social services.

Many have painted the Church's stance as an attempt to force the hand of the city council.

"It's a dangerous thing when the Catholic Church starts writing and determining the legislation and the laws of the District of Columbia," said Councilman Tommy Wells. Other members of the Council spoke similarly.

"I don't want to be cavalier in dismissing [the Church]," Councilman Phil Mendelson told the Washington Examiner. "On that other hand, I don't think the council will legislate by threats."

Outside of the council, advocates of homosexual "marriage" similarly portrayed the diocese's action as an attempt to advance its agenda by holding the city's poor for ransom.

"It's shameful of the Church to put its dogmatic position above the needs of the needy people receiving these services," said Marianne Duddy-Burke, executive director of the self-described "Catholic" homosexualist organization Dignity USA.

According to Dr. Patrick Deneen of Georgetown University, however, to cast the issue in such a light is to fundamentally misconstrue the conflict.
"Without a set of broader legal exemptions allowing for the Church to remain faithful to its definition of marriage, it will cease to be permitted by the City to provide the contracted and licensed services that it has for well over a century," he pointed out. "The Church's fundamental desire in this controversy is to continue its desire and freedom to serve."

Archdiocesan spokeswoman Gibbs shot back at critics, saying, "We are not threatening to walk out of the city."

Instead, she said, "the city is the one saying, 'If you want to continue partnering with the city, then you cannot follow your faith teachings.'"

One member of the City Council, Yvette Alexander, had attempted to pass an amendment to the bill that would have allowed individuals to refuse to provide services contrary to their religious beliefs.

"Let's say an individual caterer is a staunch Christian and someone wants him to do a cake with two grooms on top," she said. "Why can't they say, based on their religious beliefs, 'I can't do something like that'?"

Her proposed amendment, however, was shot down.

Click to expand...

In all likelihood, you know by now about the rift between the archdiocese of Washington and the DC city council over what the latter thinks is an issue of gay rights, but really relates to religious freedom. First off, the Church really needs some better communications people. The archdiocese got killed in the media over this. Why? The Washington Post spun it as the Church punishing the homeless because they hate gay people. Cue, the big bad Catholic church, the inquisition, and the nazi pope. Of course, if a Post reporter ventured into one of the many black baptist churches in southeast DC, I’m pretty sure he or she would hear far more aggressive rhetoric against homosexuality, but the Post will never go there, will it?

Click to expand...

Fantine said:

Thanks for posting an article that was complimentary to the Catholic Campaign for Human Development.

Most of what is posted about CCHD in OBOB has to do with imaginary ties to ACORN....your article adds some desperately needed balance. Thanks, Michie.

For those who aren't checking out the article:

Click to expand...