Georgetown Forges Path for Archdiocese to Follow
The standoff that is underway between the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington and the D.C. Council over pending same-sex marriage legislation parallels a difficulty for Georgetown and its policies on employee benefits. Each issue pits the Catholic Church’s commitment to doctrine against a seemingly conflicting conception of social justice. Georgetown, however, has struck a delicate balance that serves as an example for the D.C. archdiocese.
The archdiocese’s objection to the proposed marriage bill is rooted in a fear that Church groups that contract with the D.C. government for funding will be required to provide benefits to the same-sex spouses of employees. Representatives of the archdiocese have expressed concerns that such benefits would contradict the official position of the Church against same-sex nuptials. As a result, D.C. Catholic Charities — the archdiocese’s service organization — has stated that it will reject city funding for the social services it provides if the D.C. Council bill passes.
Losing the archdiocese as a partner would hurt the District, as it would adversely affect those dependent on its services. Currently, D.C. Catholic Charities assists 68,000 people in the city, including one third of the District’s homeless population. If the archdiocese severs its contracts with the D.C. Council, those in need will suffer even more. Following budget cuts to homeless services earlier this fall, the District will have to scramble to meet the demand for even greater needs in its homeless community.
As a Catholic institution, Georgetown faces a similar dilemma in its approach to employees with same-sex partners. Rather than simply rejecting benefits for same-sex couples, however, the university has chosen to diffuse the issue by providing benefits for legally domiciled adults living with employees. Georgetown employees can purchase coverage for either a spouse or one LDA. Eligible LDAs include blood relatives and individuals who have a close personal relationship with the employee. In adopting the LDA classification, the university both maintains its Jesuit mission of caring for others — by providing access to quality health care for more members of the community — and avoids a doctrinal conflict.
Given the Church’s stance on gay marriage, the D.C. archdiocese has a right to refuse District funding if the proposed bill passes. If the archdiocese wants to pull out from its contracts with the city due to the perceived burden — financial and moral — of providing benefits to same-sex partners of employees, it may certainly do so.
If it takes that path, however, the archdiocese should first consider the undue harm it will cause to an uninvolved third party. Rather than maintain its obstinacy and actively request an exemption — which has no chance of being granted, according to D.C. Councilmember David Catania (SFS ’90, LAW ’93) (I-At Large), who introduced the bill — the Church ought to think of social justice first.
Georgetown has demonstrated a willingness to be flexible on a policy that affects employees with same-sex partners in order to ensure that it meets its commitment to care. The archdiocese should take the same reasonable path in order to avoid compromising the availability and quality of social services in the District.
To send a letter to the editor on a recent campus issue or Hoya story or a viewpoint on any topic, contact opinion@thehoya.com. Letters should not exceed 300 words, and viewpoints should be between 600 to 800 words.
Nov 17 2009 at 4:00 p.m.
I think the Archdiocese of Washington could learn a lot from the example set by the Archdiocese of San Francisco on precisely this issue in 1998. That archdiocese reached a compromise with the City of San Francisco that enabled it to comply with city law requiring that same sex benefits be made available to domestic partners, without compromising the Church's principles on the issue. Here is a good summary of the compromise:
http://www.libertymagazine.org/index.php?id=499
The Vatican mustn't have minded the compromise very much. Archbishop William Levada, who brokered the compromise for the Church, was later appointed Prefect for the Congregation on the Doctrine of the Faith by Pope Benedict XVI.
Nov 18 2009 at 12:01 a.m.
It is a gross misconception that the Catholic Church will withdraw its services from the needy D.C community, or that that it will let the poor suffer "even more" because of its choice to adhere to its convictions.
The Church will simply seek other means of funding - and there's plenty of Catholics out there who are willing to step in and take the place of the city government to cover the monetary costs of running these charities. Who knows, maybe it will raise awareness for more individuals to become personally invovled in the plight of the poor and homeless, instead of shedding their responsibility and letting the government do all the work. This is a great opportunity for civil society to flourish.