It’s summer, which means it’s time for teacher contract renewals and for the media’s obligatory outrage over a Catholic school firing a teacher who publicly engages in behavior that violates Catholic teaching.
This time it’s the Archdiocese of Indianapolis, where Archbishop Charles Thompson ordered Cathedral High School and Brebeuf Jesuit Preparatory School to sever their relationships with teachers in so-called same-sex marriages. Cathedral complied (though it seemed to do so out of fear of losing diocesan support more than out of agreement with Catholic teaching). Since Brebeuf’s financial connections through the Jesuits don’t require the diocese’s approval, the school refused, which led to it being stripped of its Catholic credentials.
I’ve covered this issue before, so I’m not going to repeat all the reasons that Catholic schools have to justly fire teachers who publicly engage in scandalous behavior. Tom Nash also has a fine piece on this story. I agree with his argument that Brebeuf is not merely tolerating a teacher who fails to live up to Catholic morals but is assisting the teacher’s public act of defiance against fundamental Church teaching.
Instead, I want to share an approach to this issue that should be helpful in answering arguments put forward by those who, like Fr. James Martin, claim that if Catholic schools fire teachers for publicly violating the Church’s teaching on marriage, then they would have to fire everyone who works for them, including people “who are not loving, not forgiving and not merciful, for these represent the teachings of Jesus, the most fundamental of all church teachings.” The implicit assumption is that because they don’t fire these teachers, the ones in so-called same-sex marriages should be allowed to stay.
You can make an argument about the need to discipline public sin in a way that doesn’t apply to private sins as I do in this post, in which I respond to Fr. Martin’s claim that the Church should celebrate funerals for Catholics who persist in public, grave sin such as same-sex unions. However, I think it’s more productive to turn the tables and ask these people: so, when should Catholic schools fire their teachers?
A few reasons are obvious. Abusing students, stealing money, or breaking any other similar civil law should be grounds for termination. But people are also fired all the time for behavior that’s not illegal. Showing up to work drunk or even being chronically late are enough to justify firing someone, but why? It’s because these behaviors hinder a person’s ability to do his job. So now we have a new principle: Catholic school teachers should be fired if they do anything that hinders their ability to carry out their job.
What is the job of a Catholic schoolteacher or faculty member? It’s not to merely teach a subject at a Catholic school, as if religious instruction were only the responsibility of the theology department. Every employee of a Catholic school has a responsibility to ensure that students are formed to fully embrace and live out their Catholic faith. This includes strengthening the faith of Catholic students and evangelizing non-Catholic students.
The National Directory for Catechesis published by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops states, “All teachers in Catholic schools share in the catechetical ministry.” Even teachers of secular subjects such as math share in catechesis through the examples they set in word and deed. They talk about news and current events before official classroom instruction begins. They form friendships with students who come to learn about their personal lives and look up to them as role models. That’s why, if these teachers are bad Catholic role models, they should be let go. For example:
- In 2018, a Maryland teacher was fired after the school learned he anonymously wrote for the white-supremacist National Policy Organization.
- In 2003. the Diocese of Wilmington fired a teacher for signing her name to an advertisement defending abortion in the local newspaper.
It didn’t matter that these employees didn’t commit a crime, nor did it matter if they were non-Catholics. They engaged in behavior that students should never imitate and so, because of their free choices, they were let go. Why wouldn’t this same logic apply to employees that contract so-called same-sex marriages? Can you imagine Fr. Martin offering his typical logic in these cases? “If you fire someone for being racist you have to fire every teacher who’s unloving or uses birth control. This is discrimination!”
Me neither. Perhaps that’s why Fr. Martin’s favorite example of employees who are not expected to live under the Church’s teachings are non-Catholic faculty and teachers. He writes on Twitter, “The Archdiocese has said that an employee’s professional and private life must ‘convey and be supportive of Catholic Church teaching.’ But this would mean all Jews, Protestants, agnostics, and atheists would be fired as well.”
I know this will be controversial, but it needs to be said: perhaps Catholic schools shouldn’t hire non-Catholics in the first place. Catholic school administrators shouldn’t fire someone because of the religion they practiced when they were hired, but if employees are ministers (as the Hosanna v. Tabor case affirmed back in 2012), then you can hire based on religion.
Moreover, you can let someone go if they act in a way that is contrary to being a minister of the gospel. This includes publicly repudiating the Catholic faith by converting to another religion or publicly repudiating the Church’s teaching on marriage by contracting a so-called same-sex marriage.
The Church’s Code of Canon Law says, “Formation and education in a Catholic school must be based on the principles of Catholic doctrine, and the teachers must be outstanding in true doctrine and uprightness of life” (CIC 803.2). The National Directory for Catechesis advises Catholic school leaders to “recruit teachers who are practicing Catholics, who can understand and accept the teachings of the Catholic Church and the moral demands of the gospel and who can contribute to the achievement of the school’s Catholic identity and apostolic goals.”
The Directory does acknowledge that although “some situations might entail compelling reasons for members of another faith tradition to teach in a Catholic school, as much as possible, all teachers in a Catholic school should be practicing Catholics.” For example, if there are no applications from Catholic math teachers, then you may hire a Protestant who is willing to promote the Catholic faith and in no way publicly oppose its teachings.
But given that less than one percent of civil unions involve same-sex couples, it shouldn’t be difficult to find an applicant who at least satisfies that aspect of Catholic teaching. Moreover, hiring a non-Catholic teacher doesn’t affirm a fundamental error in society about something as important as the institution of marriage. Employing a teacher in a so-called same-sex marriage is not like hiring a Presbyterian; it’s like hiring a polygamist.
So, when you come across people who lament these kinds of decisions, seek agreement about school administrators’ right to fire teachers who can’t carry out their job. Then, narrow the discussion down to the question, “What is a Catholic school teacher’s fundamental job?” The answer: to form students’ minds and hearts so that they might well serve God and man in this life and be with God forever in the next. If a teacher has publicly rejected the Church’s wisdom in its most basic teachings, then what proof remains that he can effectively perform his job?