According to TwinCities.com,
After decades of honing his musical skills, Charles Philyaw landed his dream job in 2004 as the full-time director of music liturgy at St. Andrew Catholic Church in Verona.
The church, with 1,643 adult members, was more than just a place to work for Philyaw. He and his partner, James Mulder-Philyaw, joined the parish and participated fully in the religious community.
Then in June, it all collapsed. Philyaw said he was told by the parish priest, the Rev. Dave Timmerman, that he would no longer be retained because he was living an openly gay life. He was given two weeks’ notice.
Far from attempting to obfuscate the issue, the issue was made plain.
“Absolutely, Chuck lost his job because he’s openly gay,” said Jo Ellen Kilkenny, one of the five whose inquiries triggered Philyaw’s dismissal.
She calls him a “wonderful music director” and said she feels horrible that he lost his livelihood, yet it became indefensible for him to be in a highly visible role as an active homosexual, she said.
“We are all sinners, but when you hold a leadership position, you’re held to a higher standard than people in the pews,” she said.
I must tell you that this is a very well done article as it states plainly the Church’s side of the issue with quotes like these:
Brent King, spokesman for the Madison Catholic Diocese, said Bishop Morlino does not comment on personnel issues. But the diocese made available the Rev. Monsignor James Bartylla, director of vocations, who is helping to coordinate locally a program called Courage, a national Catholic initiative that counsels people with same-sex attraction.
While same-sex attraction is considered a disorder by the Catholic Church, it is not a sin in and of itself, Bartylla said. “It is acting on the attraction that makes it a sinful act, a grave depravity,” he said.
People with same-sex attraction must control their desires and live chaste lives, he said. If they do so, they can participate fully in church life, including in leadership positions, he said.
Because of this distinction between same-sex attraction and acting on it, it would be a mistake to say the Catholic Church dismisses anyone from employment simply for their sexual orientation, King said.
As for parishioners who are sexually active homosexuals, Bartylla said the church would welcome them, then “begin dealing immediately” with the issue. “We’d encourage them and challenge them to come into conformity with church teaching, the same as with any parishioner dealing with sin.”
In this case, the article doesn’t say if any lawsuits are pending but sexual orientation is becoming a constant addition to anti-discrimination statutes across the country. How long until churches lose the right to discriminate at all? I think we’re a bit of a way off from the government stepping in and forcing women priests or gay priests on us but couldn’t you see it argued that when an employee’s main duties are not necessarily ecclesiastical or ministerial that the Church will no longer be able to say who it hires and fires. The government could just say, “oh he’s just the musical director” or “Oh he’s just a teacher.”
The government is already forcing Catholic hospitals to give out abortifacients. They’re forcing Catholic adoption centers to arrange gay adoptions. How long do we have before America and Catholicism are mutually exclusive?
September 17, 2008 at 4:09 am
I wonder if they do articles like this for guys who cheat on their wives and are fired….
September 17, 2008 at 5:49 am
This is my home diocese.
What’s upsetting about this is that the priest knew all about his lifestyle when he was hired.
However, Bishop Morlino has (rightly) cleaned house the last few years. There’s a fair amount of press about how the choir director’s house is in foreclosure and other finacial troubles he’s facing. None of these problems would have arisen in the first place if the priest would have made the right choice at the very beginning.
September 17, 2008 at 7:38 am
He may have (wrongly) been given an opportunity to share his directing skills, but Mr. Philyaw would have to be living a most cloistered life in that proverbial closet to claim ignorance of the Church’s proscription against gay acts. Obviously, Mr. Philyaw’s lifestyle does not conform to Catholic teaching. Catholics or non-Catholics working for Church institutions should be dismissed if they cannot, by their lifestyle and word, respect Church teaching. If the hiring committee ignored the obvious, then they personally should be held accountable and dismissed for creating the conditions for scandal.
September 17, 2008 at 8:02 am
I’m not being facetious, but what does it mean to say “acting on the attraction” or being “openly gay”? If I understand the Church’s teaching, there is no sin in having same sex attraction; you just have to live chastely.
Is merely living with another person of the same sex enough of a scandal to assume that he’s “acting on the attraction”? Is this a near occasion of sin kind of thing? Because it’s certainly plausible (if not entirely probable) that a gay person might cohabitate with someone and still abstain.
I raise this point because it bears clarification: bigotry is wrong. We can’t on the one hand say that we accept SSA people into our communities, and then toss them out because we suspect they’re not living up to Catholic teaching. If I suspect that the music director is using artificial birth control, but I have no proof, can I have him fired on hearsay?
I don’t know anything about this particular case, but it seems that there needs to be some pretty strong evidence that the person is “acting” on the attraction before any action is taken. And frankly, it seems a little icky to think that someone might actually have that kind of evidence.
September 17, 2008 at 8:04 am
Anon-
If a hetro person lives with someone they’re not married to, in such a manner that most assume they’re…um…sleeping together, it’s considered scandal.
Same for same sex couples.
September 17, 2008 at 8:08 am
Side note:
Philyaw directed the church choir, led the liturgy committee and played for multiple Masses weekly. He said he was upfront with Timmerman before his hiring about being in a gay relationship.
Whoever hired him is at fault. A lot.
Would he have hired someone who declared “I’m cheating on my wife, and living openly with my mistress”?
September 17, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Is merely living with another person of the same sex enough of a scandal to assume that he’s “acting on the attraction”? Is this a near occasion of sin kind of thing? Because it’s certainly plausible (if not entirely probable) that a gay person might cohabitate with someone and still abstain.
I’m gonna just take a stab here and guess that the hyphenated last name of the “partner” might be a big, neon, blinking clue.
September 17, 2008 at 1:06 pm
I think he has a point.
September 17, 2008 at 1:46 pm
People have lost all sense of what scandal is. I don’t how many times on a forum a cohabiting heterosexual posts about their situation and gets indignant when others tell them it is wrong. “People are just assuming we are having sex! It’s not my problem if others assume that….blah, blah, blah.” Well, they may be guilty of gossip, but the cohabiting couple is guilty of scandal–basically their actions are telling everyone around them it’s ok to cohabit.
September 17, 2008 at 3:50 pm
This is my home diocese, as well, and I can only imagine the firestorm that will erupt in the People’s Republic of Madison because of it. Let’s pray for Mr. Philyaw, Mr. Mulder, Bishop Morlino, Msgr. Jim, and Fr. Dave. This is going to be an ugly one.
September 17, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Given that he was apparently upfront about living an openly gay lifestyle when he applied for the job, they should have at least worked out something where he was still employed until he could find another job. It’s the parishes fault, not his, that he was hired when he shouldn’t have been.
September 17, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Also is the parish cleaning house in the rest of their staff. I’ve never been in a parish that didn’t have at least one heterodox religious education teacher. What about EMHCs, acolytes, lectors, etc.? Has the parish told them to shape up or ship out? I’d feel a lot better if it could be demonstrated that this was a parish wide thing and not singling out one person.
September 17, 2008 at 5:33 pm
They knew this man was openly living a homosexual relationship and hired him anyway. Who ever hired him should be fired. Someone should definitely apologize to this man and then make him a referral to the Episcopal Church.
September 17, 2008 at 6:29 pm
Whomever hired this guy should be fired for sure.
The thing the media needs to realize is that this would of happened if it was a heterosexual cheating on his wife, or a heretic, if you violate Church teaching when employed by the Church, you should be fired 🙂
September 17, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Hold on a sec! Aren’t they called “Music Ministers” anymore? It seems logical to conclude that the Church and not the state should decide who will or will not be one of its ministers.
September 17, 2008 at 8:02 pm
I know of at least one case where a Catholic school principal was fired for being divorced and remarried without an annulment. The bishop pointed to the “morals clause” in the hiring contract and she was out the door.
With the right contracts, diocese may be able to circumvent anti-discrimination law.
September 17, 2008 at 8:33 pm
“I know of at least one case where a Catholic school principal was fired for being divorced and remarried without an annulment. The bishop pointed to the ‘morals clause’ in the hiring contract and she was out the door.”
I may be completely off-base about this, but in my years (off and on) of parish work, I meet a disproportionate number of single males in their 30s and 40s and beyond, who are — how can I say this? — a bit light in the loafers. Perhaps they have unnatural proclivities, but are able to lead chaste lives, in which case I say, more power to them. It would only concern me if such a trend were to keep men away who are not so challenged in this area.
But if the trend is indeed there, the chances of hiring people who can’t contain themselves is going to increase. Putting in a “morals clause” does not negate the possibility of having “best friends” who cast suspicion without cause. It has to be perfectly clear upon hiring, as to what is okay, and what is not okay. It’s not enough to put it in the fine print. You have to discuss it during the interview.
September 17, 2008 at 10:31 pm
Separation of Church and State only works one-way.
NB: Catechism 2358
“They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided”
September 17, 2008 at 10:31 pm
Separation of Church and State only works one-way.
NB: Catechism 2358
“They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided”
September 18, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Many years ago I got my first church musician job because the organist was fired because (1) he divorced his wife (with whom he several children and (2) when the ink was barely dry on the legal papers, he remarried – and acknowledged that he had been seeing the new wife and that had precipitated the divorce.