Connecticut bishops have urged parishioners to fight a proposed state law that would allow them to control their individual parish's financial affairs.The bill, introduced last Thursday by the Legislature's Judiciary Committee - chaired by Sen. Andrew J. McDonald, D-Stamford, and Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven - caught many Catholics by surprise, who first heard about it during weekend Masses.
In a statement read at Fairfield County Masses, Bridgeport Bishop William E. Lori delivered a harsh rebuke to the proposal, charging it "directly attacks the Roman Catholic Church and our faith" and was a "thinly-veiled attempt to silence the Catholic Church on the important issues of the day, such as same-sex marriage."
In rejecting the proposed law, Lori said "this irrational, unlawful and bigoted bill jeopardizes the religious liberty of our church."
But McDonald said the bill did no such thing. He emphasized that any parish wishing to could leave its affairs under diocesan control. The measure also leaves to bishops and priests "matters pertaining exclusively to religious tenets and practices."
According to McDonald, the immediate impetus behind the bill was what he called the worst case of financial mismanagement in a Connecticut Catholic parish, in which a priest in Darien was convicted of stealing up to $1.4 million from lay donations, as well as another investigation in Greenwich. He said he was asked by his constituents, who felt victimized by the events at St. John Church in Darien, as well as other Catholic faithful throughout the diocese who want to see more "transparency" relating to the funds they contribute.
"This has been submitted by parishioners who are devout in their faith," McDonald said.
Still, both Lori and Hartford Bishop Henry J. Mansell called on Catholics to attend a Judiciary Committee public hearing Wednesday in Hartford to protest the bill.
The hearing is scheduled to begin at noon in Room 2C in the Legislative Office Building. Several local parishes are organizing bus transportation to the hearing.
The bishops' announcement touched off an immediate uproar from parishioners who saw the proposal as an affront to their traditions.
"I'm upset by it," said William Mortimer, of Bridgeport, who attended Mass at Assumption Church in Fairfield. "I'm amazed that this bill is being considered by these two legislators."
Mary Sholomicky, 49, of Stratford, heard about the proposed law by attending the noon Mass at Our Lady of Grace parish. "It was quite a shock because of the First Amendment of the Constitution guarantees the right to practice religion. If I didn't want to do that, I'd live in China. Any person of any religious denomination should really be nervous. They are targeting Catholics now; who knows who's next down the road six months, six years."
Sholomicky said the law "would take away the authority of the bishop, the priests and the pope."
Philip Lacovara, a prominent lawyer who attends St. Aloysius Parish in New Canaan, said the bill isn't even constitutional.
Pointing to an opinion from the late Supreme Court Justice William Brennan in a case relating to the Serbian Orthodox Church, Lacovara said the Catholic church has the authority to decide its own governance.
"The church is the entity that decides how it will be organized," he said.
But Paul Lakeland, the Rev. Aloysius P. Kelley, S.J., professor of Catholic Studies and chair of the Catholic Studies Department at Fairfield University, disagreed.
"This legislation is not an interference with the free exercise of religion," he said, noting bishops would still retain their say over doctrinal matters.
In fact, he added, in some jurisdictions, such as Philadelphia and New York, the laity had a strong tradition of parish oversight that changed with time.
"No one who supports the present situation in the church can say it's always been that way," Lakeland said.
Lawlor said the bill would revise a 1955 religious corporation act by requiring churches to open up financial records, if the parish set up its own board of directors. If passed into law, parishes would be governed by an elected board of laypersons that would have the power to establish and approve church budgets, manage all financial affairs, provide for auditing of financial records, develop and implement strategic plans and develop outreach programs.
The pastor of the congregation would report to the board of directors on all "administrative and financial matters," the proposed bill reads.
According to the measure, the bishop and priests would remain in charge of "matters pertaining exclusively to religious tenets and practices."
Lori said, "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 their pastors and the bishops would effectively be excluded."
In his statement, Lori continued: "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 would someday be forced on other denominations. The state has no business controlling religion.
"For the state Legislature - which has not reversed a $1 billion deficit in the fiscal year - to try to manage the Catholic Church makes no sense. The Catholic Church not only lives within her means, but stretches her resources to provide more social, charitable and educational services than many other private institutions in the state. This bill threatens those services at a time when the state is cutting services. The Catholic Church is needed now more than ever," Lori said.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disclaimer
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to either myself or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.
The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that I agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
Sotto Voce
(Source: CTHUS)