Spokane, Wash., Feb 19, 2020 / 05:08 pm (CNA).- Gonzaga University’s plan to become the first Jesuit university to open a law clinic focused primarily on LGBT advocacy has raised “serious concerns” for Spokane’s Bishop Thomas Daly.
“While the Catholic tradition does uphold the dignity of every human being, the LGBT Rights law clinic’s scope of practice could bring the GU Law School into conflict with the religious freedom of Christian individuals and organizations,” the Spokane diocese said Feb. 19 in a statement to CNA.
“There is also a concern that Gonzaga Law School will be actively promoting, in the legal arena and on campus, values that are contrary to the Catholic faith and natural law.”
“Bishop Daly and the diocese are studying the issue further and will be discussing these serious concerns with the university administration,” the diocese added.
The diocese told CNA it was not consulted before the university announced the creation of the clinic.
The Lincoln LGBTQ+ Rights Clinic at Gonzaga was developed in partnership with the school’s Center for Civil and Human Rights, the university said in an announcement Feb. 14.
The clinic “aims to advance the equal rights and dignity of individuals who identify as LGBTQ+ through education, programming, advocacy, research, and legal representation.”
It will also provide “a special opportunity for Gonzaga law students to help protect and advance the rights of the LGBTQ+ community,” the university added.
Gonzaga’s law school dean, Jacob Rooksby, told CNA that the LGBTQ+ Rights Clinic fits within the Catholic identity of the university because “it allows our students the chance to learn firsthand how law and the work of lawyers can further respect for individual dignity.”
The university noted that Harvard, Cornell, Emory, and UCLA— all secular institutions— have developed LGBTQ+ law clinics.
Father Bryan Pham, S.J., a civil and canon lawyer and chaplain for the Gonzaga School of Law, told CNA that the goal of the clinic is to create a space that helps students understand the viewpoints of a broad range of clients.
“I don’t think there’s anything that the law school or the clinic will be doing that would be in opposition to the Church’s teaching, other than the fact that we want students to engage in this in a civil context of a law setting,” Pham told CNA in an interview.
He said the clinic is not “about converting people or trying to get them to believe one way or another.”
“The law in this country is pretty clear about discrimination, so how do we expand that conversation in a much broader context?” he said.
The Lincoln LGBTQ+ Rights Clinic will “offer legal services to members of the public” with the help of second- and third-year law students, under the direction of a full-time faculty member, the university’s announcement explained.
Pham said it will be up to individual professors to decide whether or not to present the Church’s teaching in the classroom. He said “when it’s my turn to be part of the conversation, I will definitely bring it up, absolutely.”
Concerns mentioned by Daly about religious liberty seem rooted in litigation some Catholic institutions have faced in recent years.
In the United States, various Catholic schools and dioceses have faced lawsuits from employees who have been fired after contracting civil same-sex marriages in violation of the diocesan or school policy.
In some states, such as Illinois, California, and Massachusetts, Catholic adoption agencies which do not place children with same-sex couples have been forced to close their doors after losing legal challenges.
In addition, Catholic hospitals have faced lawsuits from people who identify as transgender and wish to recieve surgery or hormone therapy to change their sex.
CNA asked Gonzaga whether students participating in the clinic might find themselves representing clients who are suing Catholic institutions.
“We are in the early stages of this initiative, working to hire a director and launch the clinic in the fall. Given that we are early in our development in the clinic, it is premature on our part to respond to hypothetical circumstances,” university spokesperson Chantell Cosner said in an email response to CNA.
“We anticipate being in a position to speak more specifically about the work of the clinic later this fall.”
But Pham said even if the clinic advocates for same-sex marriage, “the Church won’t recognize that, so this really isn’t an issue.”
In 2003, the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said that “in those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty.”
“One must refrain from any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws and, as far as possible, from material cooperation on the level of their application. In this area, everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection,” the CDF added.
According to Pham, more basic issues are likely to be the clinic’s focus.
“For us, it’s more about how people are discriminated against. So in places of employment, housing, bank loans— you know, they won’t give a loan to a couple because they’re a same-sex union— so those are really basic human issues,” the priest said.
Pham said his main concern is people’s assumptions that the clinic will advocate for positions contrary to Church teaching.
“My concern is people jumping to conclusions, and just looking at the name of the clinic, and then making an assumption about it,” Pham commented.
“This is something that we’re aware of, when we were thinking about doing this clinic. We are a Catholic Jesuit school, our foundation is within Catholic social teaching, so I think my main concern is people hearing about this and often jumping to conclusions without finding out.”
Pham said the university uses a 1997 document from the United State Conference of Catholic Bishops, “Always Our Children,” as a guide for how “we work with our students and with community members who are of that community.”
“Always Our Children” was, at the time of its release, criticized by groups who say they are faithful to Church teaching, such as Courage. It was largely embraced by groups critical of Catholic doctrine, such as DignityUSA. The document was not voted on by the full body of bishops, nor even discussed by them before its issuance, according to the National Catholic Register.
“Always Our Children” was revised and reissued in 1998, again, without a full vote of the U.S. bishops. One of the changes was the addition of a footnote to a 1992 letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith regarding legislative proposals to address discrimination against people who identify as gay.
“There are areas in which it is not unjust discrimination to take sexual orientation into account,” the document says, “for example, in the placement of children for adoption or foster care, in employment of teachers or athletic coaches, and in military recruitment.”
“‘Sexual orientation’ does not constitute a quality comparable to race, ethnic background, etc., in respect to nondiscrimination,” the document continued.
“Including ‘homosexual orientation’ among the considerations on the basis of which it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead to regarding homosexuality as a positive source of human rights, for example, in respect to so-called affirmative action or preferential treatment in hiring practices.”
In 2006, the USCCB issued an new document, Ministry to Persons with a Homosexual Inclination. That document, which was approved by a vote of the bishops, cited the CDF’s 1992 letter more explicitly.
“As human persons, persons with a homosexual inclination have the same basic rights as all people, including the right to be treated with dignity. Nevertheless “‘sexual orientation’ does not constitute a quality comparable to race, ethnic background, etc., in respect to nondiscrimination,” the 2006 document said.
“Therefore, it is not unjust, for example, to limit the bond of marriage to the union of a woman and a man. It is not unjust to oppose granting to homosexual couples benefits that in justice should belong to marriage alone,” the document continued.
The Catholic Church teaches that while homosexual inclinations are not sinful, homosexual acts “are contrary to the natural law…under no circumstances can they be approved.”
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that people with “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” should be “accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”
For its part, the Diocese of Spokane said it will approach talks with Gonzaga with hope for a positive resolution to points of disagreement.
“Bishop Daly is a strong supporter of Catholic education and hopes that Gonzaga will continue to be a partner in the Catholic mission of faithful education in the Church,” the diocese said.
[…]
Free will cannot be demonstrated scientifically. Long reflexion on that question brought me to the conviction that its evidence is the ability to distinguish opposites, and to choose the opposite of what logic might suggest.
Later, in my studies of Aquinas he confirmed the same. AI is incapable of this. From a spiritual perspective the direction that God may inspire us to take cannot be predictable in accord with logarithms and data input since as Job would say who knows the mind of the Lord. For example the gifts of the Holy Spirit inspiring acts that defy human logic, acts of charity and witness to truth that escape anything less than the divine intelligence. Man alone created in God’s image may reflect that intelligence.
While AI has valuable uses, its danger is in rendering man a pawn who has traded in his soul for mammon. Hopefully the presence of Catholic scientists as Barr suggests will focus on avoiding that.
Additionally, Man’s freest acts are moral acts, acts exclusive to Man made in God’s image who alone apprehends the difference between good and evil. Free will is exemplified in choosing the good over evil, because the evil route is that in most cases the animal instinctively chooses.
About free will, two comments:
FIRST, super-scientist Albert Einstein rejected the necessary and larger notion that there’s even such a thing (!) as a personal God (citation below). Instead of, say, just a super-equation as Stephen Hawking later proposed, or maybe now AI, although partly housebroken to serve an evangelization mission…But, “Who rides on the back of a tiger can never dismount” (Chinese proverb).
And, SECOND, from the interreligious perspective, fatalistic Islam (the true religion!) denies free will, but then explains that God allows us to think we have free will!
Here’s the quote from Einstein:
“The main source of the present-day conflicts between the spheres of religion and of science lies in the concept of a personal God [….] In their struggle for the ethical good [only this?], teachers of religion must have the stature to give up the doctrine of a personal God, that is, to give up that source of fear and hope which in the past placed such vast power in the hands of priests. In their labors they will have to avail themselves of those forces which are capable of cultivating the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in humanity itself [….] After religious teachers accomplish the refining process indicated they will surely recognize with joy that true religion [another true religion!] has been ennobled and made more profound by scientific knowledge” (Albert Einstein, “Science and Religion”, 1939, in “Out of My Later Years,” Philosophical Library, 1950).
No greater stupidity occurs than when one tries to prove superior intelligence. As an identifiable group, scientists are often as dumb as dumb gets. At their worst, their thought can be borderline sociopathic, and they’ll gravitate to any belief that enables them to retain condescending dismissals towards those possessing such things like simple faith. They are capable of being so stupid they cannot even exercise enough imagination to postulate a thought experiment long enough to consider that a personal God would not hold any special privileges or unique affinity for those of higher IQ, especially given the mountains of evidence that the greatest evils in this vale of tears world require the greatest levels of conceit and talent.
What a blessing to the Church these Catholic scientists are. I’m aware of assemblies of Catholic artists and musicians, Catholic physicians and Catholic lawyers but I wonder if anyone has yet put together a list of various interest groups that come together to share ideas and experiences AS CATHOLICS.
I’d venture to say that wherever Catholics assemble as Catholics on some common ground of interest or expertise, there is grace. We should encourage assemblies of Catholic small farmers and homesteaders. We should encourage assemblies of Catholic trades people, Catholics involved in commerce, Catholics involved in government at all levels. I’d like to see more self-identification as Catholics in areas beyond parish life.
Not to mention Catholic politicians and statesmen.
There are “Catholics” and then there are Catholics (especially among the professional politician class).
Fascinating website they have, just google their name and check it out. Their list of Catholic scientists is a long one and includes a biography of Blessed Nicolas Steno the polymath genius who enriched various fields of science but is primarily considered the founder of the science of geology. The biography is decent but could be much longer. He conceived the concept of Deep Time, one of the fundamental principals behind science ever since. He needs one more miracle to be declared a saint. (Hint,hint to anybody needing a miracle.) The society has many articles, including apologetics as well as news items. It is great new site for me to explore when I get bored with the same old thing.
This organization is misnamed. It is not a society of scientists, but rather a society of academics who claim to be catholic scientists. It is a network of academics seeking to promote their careers. Real scientists outside of academia have not place in this organization. As such little real change can be expected of it. I write from personal experience.