Vatican City, Sep 23, 2019 / 04:07 pm (CNA).- The Vatican’s Congregation for Catholic Education has temporarily suspended a decree from the Archbishop of Indianapolis that revoked the Catholic identity of a Jesuit high school. The suspension will have effect while the congregation considers an appeal of the decree.
The June 21 decree from Archbishop Charles Thompson said the archdiocese would no longer recognize Brebeuf Jesuit Preparatory School as Catholic, after a disagreement about the school’s employment of a teacher who attempted to contract a same-sex marriage.
Fr. Brian Paulson, SJ, head of the Jesuits’ Midwest Province, has led the appeal of the archbishop’s decree. After Thompson declined to rescind the decree, Paulson turned to the Congregation for Catholic Education to consider the matter.
The president of Brebeuf, Fr. Bill Verbryke, SJ, said Sept. 23 that the congregation “has decided to suspend the Archbishop’s decree on an interim basis, pending its final resolution of our appeal.”
Verbryke added that “It is very important to understand, however, what this temporary suspension of the Archbishop’s decree does NOT mean. It does not mean that the matter has been resolved, or that any permanent decision has been made. It also does not mean that anyone should infer that the Congregation for Catholic Education is leaning one way or the other on any of the issues at hand.”
“The Congregation has simply granted a temporary suspension of the Archbishop’s decree until it makes a final decision,” Verbryke explained in a message to the school community.
Verbryke noted that Thompson had “very kindly informed me that, as a result of this temporary suspension of his decree, Brebeuf is free to resume our normal sacramental celebrations of the Eucharist.”
The archbishop had already granted permission for daily Masses to be said at the school’s chapel, but had denied permission for Masses offered on particular occasions, such as an Aug. 15 “Mass of the Holy Spirit as a traditional opening-of-the-school-year- Mass.”
The school’s president said it is unknown how long the appeal process will last, “but please be assured that we are sincere in our desire to resolve our disagreement with the Archbishop and resume the strong relationship we had always enjoyed with the Archdiocese since our founding in 1962.”
He emphasized that the “process is ongoing in an environment of not only deep love for our Church, but also, despite our differences on this matter, deep respect for the Archbishop. Ultimately, our desire is to remain in full communion with the Catholic Church, without restrictions on our celebration of the Eucharist, and that our identity as a Catholic school be fully recognized and supported by the Archdiocese.”
Kris Mackey, advancement and communications director for the Jesuits’ Midwest province, told CNA that Verbryke’s letter “mirrored the letter” received from the Congregation for Catholic Education.
She added that the congregation’s suspension of Thompson’s decree was made at the congregation’s discretion, and that adjacent to its appeal, the province “had asked for the suspension during the time that the decision-making is happening.”
While the congregation “granted yes to the suspension,” Mackey reflected, “of course they’re discerning,” and how long the appeals process will last is unknown.
“The two are kind of unrelated,” she said. The suspension does not indicate the congregation is more likely to rule one way or another.
In a statement, the Archdiocese of Indianapolis said that the temporary suspension was “following standard canon-law procedures,” and that “this is a common, temporary, measure that does not affect a final determination.”
The local Church added that it awaits a final determination from the Congregation for Catholic Education.
The archdiocese had announced June 20 that “every archdiocesan Catholic school and private Catholic school has been instructed to clearly state in its contracts and ministerial job descriptions that all ministers must convey and be supportive of all teachings of the Catholic Church.”
Teachers, the archdiocese said in June, are classified as ministers because “it is their duty and privilege to ensure that students receive instruction in Catholic doctrine and practice. To effectively bear witness to Christ, whether they teach religion or not, all ministers in their professional and private lives must convey and be supportive of Catholic Church teaching.”
“Regrettably, Brebeuf Jesuit Preparatory School has freely chosen not to enter into such agreements that protect the important ministry of communicating the fullness of Catholic teaching to students. Therefore, Brebeuf Jesuit Preparatory School will no longer be recognized as a Catholic institution by the Archdiocese of Indianapolis.”
Layton Payne-Elliot, the Brebuef teacher who attempted a same-sex marriage, is civilly married to Joshua Payne-Elliot, who was dismissed earlier this year from a different Catholic high school in Indianapolis, because contracting a same-sex marriage violates archdiocesan policies and Catholic teaching.
Joshua Payne-Elliot filed a lawsuit against the archdiocese in protest of his dismissal, one day after having reached a settlement with Cathedral High School, where he had been employed.
The archdiocese has said that “religious liberty, which is a hallmark of the U.S. Constitution and has been tested in the U.S. Supreme Court, acknowledges that religious organizations may define what conduct is not acceptable and contrary to the teachings of its religion, for its school leaders, guidance counselors, teachers and other ministers of the faith.”
In a press conference June 27, Archbishop Thompson stressed that Payne-Elliot was removed not because he was homosexual, but because he had contracted a same-sex marriage, in opposition to Church teaching on marriage.
The conflict between Brebeuf and the archdiocese began with an archdiocesan request that the contract of Layton Payne-Elliot not be renewed because he is in a same-sex marriage.
The school leaders wrote in June that “after long and prayerful consideration, we determined that following the Archdiocese’s directive would not only violate our informed conscience on this particular matter, but also set a concerning precedent for future interference in the school’s operations and other governance matters that Brebeuf Jesuit leadership has historically had the sole right and privilege to address and decide.”
[…]
Francis said there was a Spanish saying that “God forgives always; we men forgive sometimes; the earth never forgives.”
********
I’ve always heard that as “Nature” never forgives. And that doesn’t portray nature as a loving mother but rather as something affected by the results of a fallen world: disease, famine, natural disasters, etc.
We suffer the natural consequences of some of our poor choices.
To be clear, the virus sent to the rest of the world by the Communist government of China is not nature’s punishment for the “sin” of “climate change.” Some of the statements coming from the Holy Father beggar belief. Interestingly, the government of China, with which this papacy has such amiable relations, has not come in for any criticism from the Vatican during this crisis. On the other hand, Francis has not been able to restrain himself from taking veiled swipes at Trump. Pretty telling, I’d say.
In his urgent and strategic efforts to beckon very disparate and fragmented “movements” toward a more moral commonwealth, the Holy Father makes very good points–but from time to time is he perhaps too ambiguous(?).
Do we really “sin” against the earth? And do we really engage only when “our children take to the streets to teach us the obvious”? Did St. John Paul II make the same points–also in an evangelizing and well-grounded way (and less earthy, shall we say), when he wrote:
“Man remains above all a being who seeks the truth and strives to live in the truth, deepening his understanding through dialogue which involves past and future [both!] generations” (Centesimus Annus, 1191, n.49). And, without seemingly conflating the two spheres by poetic license, he too drew urgent attention to both the endangered “natural ecology” and the related but also distinct—-and sinned against—-members of the “human ecology” (nn. 37-40).
“We have sinned against the earth” implies a living person. We can sin against a brother who has a soul created in God’s image. Figuratively. We actually sin against God when we sin against our brother. As the Pope acknowledges. As an afterthought and nuance of ambiguity. Yes we should care for our common home. If we misuse the planet, dump our garbage, old vehicle down a ravine we sin against God not the planet. Nevertheless love for our common home as couched clashes with Christ’s admonition against [an excessive] love of this world. The Earth Day prayer has that connotation when viewed in context. Goddess of the Andes veneration cannot be dismissed. Earth Day “is an occasion for renewing our commitment to love and care for our common home and for the weaker members of our human family.” Nothing is said here, very little is said elsewhere about the millions upon millions of infants murdered in the womb. Jeffrey Sachs is chosen as a Vatican consultant on the Family. Obviously not in an effort to care for those who are actually the most weak and vulnerable. There’s an exaggerated emphasis on ecological concern that makes “love and care for our common home” suggest a competitive love with the divinity. Is such exaggerated ecological concern, though not necessarily intentional albeit idolatry in disguise? If so then this must be addressed and set right.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-27/china-ghost-cities-show-growth-driven-by-debt/9912186
It is, indeed, ironic to hold a conference on biodiversity in China. Perhaps, it is to prove a point of the destruction the country made over the decades when building massive cities that NO ONE lives in. Just think of the swats of land cleared for all those projects!
We are privileged to be living on God’s Holy Ground.