Fired for marrying a divorced man

[ultra laser]

Obviously someone unable to live according to Catholicism has no place as a Catholic teacher.

 

[AreaCode7O7]

Originally posted by: ultra laser
Obviously someone unable to live according to Catholicism has no place as a Catholic teacher.

But they hire other non-Catholic teachers.

?We have very clear policies on what we expect from Catholic people on our faculty, and there has been a violation of that,? Brother Peter Pontolillo told the Express-News. ?When a person does something that is obviously contrary to everything that our Catholic school stands for, we cannot just look through our fingers.?

Raised in the Catholic faith, LaFortune had transferred to her fiancé's nondenominational church before the conflict unfolded, the Express-News reported.

Since Central Catholic High School regularly hires non-Catholic teachers, LaFortune argued that since she no longer attended a Catholic church, she should not be held accountable to the church's laws.

The school was not persuaded.

I think she'll win this. They have two sets of policies, one for Catholic and the other for non-Catholic teachers. Since they sign on for this willingly upon hire, it's probably defensible in court. However, this teacher now is no longer Catholic. If she were Catholic and disobeying the policies they'd have a case. Instead she's exactly equal to the other non-Catholic faculty.

The issue at question, I suppose, is whether she was allowed to renounce her Catholicism and still keep her job. Her marital status only becomes an issue if the answer to that is "no".

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: dphantom
Generally, if you are employed by a religous institution, you abide by their rules regarding conduct. There have been other cases where the plaintiff has lost on similar grounds, one here locally. So while I don't know all the facts of this particular instance such as any documents new hires must sign acknowledging institutional practices, I think she will have an uphill battle.

I think she's got a good case on the basis that they're hiring other non-Catholic teachers and not regulating their marital status in regards to previous divorces. The school can have a religious standard but it needs to be equally applied to be protected. If they're not equal applying it, she could quite likely win her lawsuit.

Since Central Catholic High School regularly hires non-Catholic teachers, LaFortune argued that since she no longer attended a Catholic church, she should not be held accountable to the church's laws.

However, she takes communion at the school's celebrations of mass. That means she is asserting herself to be Catholic since the Roman Catholic church has a closed table (for others who do not know, this means that only people who are confirmed and practicing Roman Catholics may take communion in a Roman Catholic church).

So she seems to me to be in a losing position either either way. There are two results that I can see:

1) The court finds that it considers her to still be Roman Catholic based on her participation in the sacrament of Communion in the school's masses. In this case, the school has grounds to fire her as she is clearly not in the same group as the non-Catholic teachers (who would not receive Communion during school masses).

2) The court finds that it considers her to have repudiated her Roman Catholic faith by not attending on Sundays. In this case, the school has grounds to fire her because she is improperly participating in communion (communion is forbidden to persons in apostasy).

Honestly, it seems as though she would be in a weaker position if the court, in fact, declared her to have repudiated her faith.

ZV

 

[AreaCode7O7]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: dphantom
Generally, if you are employed by a religous institution, you abide by their rules regarding conduct. There have been other cases where the plaintiff has lost on similar grounds, one here locally. So while I don't know all the facts of this particular instance such as any documents new hires must sign acknowledging institutional practices, I think she will have an uphill battle.

I think she's got a good case on the basis that they're hiring other non-Catholic teachers and not regulating their marital status in regards to previous divorces. The school can have a religious standard but it needs to be equally applied to be protected. If they're not equal applying it, she could quite likely win her lawsuit.

Since Central Catholic High School regularly hires non-Catholic teachers, LaFortune argued that since she no longer attended a Catholic church, she should not be held accountable to the church's laws.

However, she takes communion at the school's celebrations of mass. That means she is asserting herself to be Catholic since the Roman Catholic church has a closed table (for others who do not know, this means that only people who are confirmed and practicing Roman Catholics may take communion in a Roman Catholic church).

So she seems to me to be in a losing position either either way. There are two results that I can see:

1) The court finds that it considers her to still be Roman Catholic based on her participation in the sacrament of Communion in the school's masses. In this case, the school has grounds to fire her as she is clearly not in the same group as the non-Catholic teachers (who would not receive Communion during school masses).

2) The court finds that it considers her to have repudiated her Roman Catholic faith by not attending on Sundays. In this case, the school has grounds to fire her because she is improperly participating in communion (communion is forbidden to persons in apostasy).

Honestly, it seems as though she would be in a weaker position if the court, in fact, declared her to have repudiated her faith.

ZV

I don't see it saying she's continued to take communion. If she were, you're right but the school would probably need to pursue that as the primary infraction.

 

[teclis1023]

My opinion:

If it's a privately funded school instituted on a specific set of rules (i.e. Catholicism), then it should be able to fire its staff if they disregard the the institution's rules.

If the school receives even $1 of public tax payer money, then the school should be subject to the same regulations that any other public agency or business is held to.

Therefore, it's less a matter of whether this lady got a fair deal or not, and more of a matter of whether this school is using tax payer dollars to push/enforce its religious agenda.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: ultra laser
Obviously someone unable to live according to Catholicism has no place as a Catholic teacher.

Obviously. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.