My hands are literally shaking with outrage as I write this. On March 5, 2009, the Connecticut State House of Representatives Judiciary Committee introduced Legislative Bill # 1098, a direct attempt to remove financial and administrative control of the Dioceses of Bridgeport and Hartford and its member parishes from its rightful place with the Bishops and pastors and transfer it to lay boards of directors (with the bishop as a non-voting ex officio member...convenient) for the stated "purpose" of investigating "misappropriation of funds by certain religious organizations." This from a body that engages in and shamelessly perpetuates the misappropriation of funds by lay organizations.
As I have nowhere else been able to find the actual text of this bill, I am here reprinting it in its entirety from the state of Connecticut's legislative website, so you may see for yourself the full extent of this brazen and egregious violation of the First Amendment. The original link for the text can be found here.
Somewhere, the remaining members of the apostate group disingenuously named the Association for the Rights of Catholics in the Church (ARCC) must be celebrating. This legislation is in perfect conformity with their ideal of a lay-governed Church.
The text, in all its legal pomposity, can be found below. Pay special attention to the consequences of this legislation as outlined in section E, and also to the Statement of Purpose at the end of the text. In any sane world, this would be struck down by any court of law and the perpetrators arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law under any statutes governing penalties for attempted despotism. We do not, of course, live in a sane world, so who knows how the courts will act. But make no mistake: this is a Soviet-style full frontal assault on the religious freedom of the Catholic Church in the state of Connecticut. As such, don't expect the ACLU - self-appointed champions of First Amendment rights - to lift a finger in the Church's defense.
An official statement from Bishop William Lori of the Diocese of Bridgeport responding to this abomination can be found here.
General Assembly
Raised Bill No. 1098
January Session, 2009
LCO No. 4528
*04528_______JUD*
Referred to Committee on Judiciary
Introduced by:
(JUD)
AN ACT MODIFYING CORPORATE LAWS RELATING TO CERTAIN RELIGIOUS CORPORATIONS.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:
Section 1. Section 33-279 of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective October 1, 2009):
(a) A corporation may be organized in connection with any Roman Catholic Church or congregation in this state, by filing in the office of the Secretary of the State a certificate signed by the archbishop or bishop and the vicar-general of the archdiocese or of the diocese in which such congregation is located and the pastor and two laymen belonging to such congregation, stating that they have so organized for the purposes hereinafter mentioned. [Such archbishop or bishop, vicar-general and pastor of such congregation and, in case of the death or other disability of the archbishop or bishop, the administrator of the archdiocese or diocese for the time being, the chancellor of the archdiocese or diocese and the pastor of such congregation shall be members, ex officio, of such corporation, and, upon their death, resignation, removal or preferment, their successors in office shall become such members in their stead. The two lay members shall be appointed annually, in writing, during the month of January from the lay members of the congregation by a majority of the ex-officio members of the corporation; and three members of the corporation, of whom one shall be a layman, shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.]
(b) The corporation shall have a board of directors consisting of not less than seven nor more than thirteen lay members. The archbishop or bishop of the diocese or his designee shall serve as an ex-officio member of the board of directors without the right to vote.
(c) The members of the board of directors shall be elected from among the lay members of the congregation at an annual meeting of the corporation. The members of the board of directors shall serve for staggered terms of not more than three years. The members of the board of directors shall owe a fiduciary duty to the corporation and the members of the congregation.
(d) The board of directors shall meet at least quarterly. A majority of the members of the board of directors shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Notice of the meetings of the board of directors shall be sent by mail or electronic mail to each member of the board of directors and be delivered or published in a manner likely to come to the attention of a majority of the members of the congregation.
(e) The general administrative and financial powers of the corporation shall be exercised by or under the authority of the board of directors. Such powers shall include, but are not limited to:
(1) Establishing and approving budgets;
(2) Managing the financial affairs of the corporation;
(3) Providing for the auditing of the financial records of the corporation;
(4) Developing and implementing strategic plans and capital projects;
(5) Developing outreach programs and other services to be provided to the community; and
(6) Any of the powers enumerated in section 33-1036.
(f) The pastor of the congregation shall report to the board of directors with respect to administrative and financial matters.
(g) Any member of the corporation is entitled to inspect and copy, during regular business hours at the corporation's principal office, any of the business records of the corporation including accounting records and financial statements of the corporation if such member gives the corporation written notice of his demand at least five business days before the date on which he wishes to inspect and copy.
(h) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit, restrict or derogate from any power, right, authority, duty or responsibility of the bishop or pastor in matters pertaining exclusively to religious tenets and practices.
Sec. 2. (NEW) (Effective October 1, 2009) The provisions of section 33-279 of the general statutes, as amended by this act, shall apply to all corporations in existence on January 1, 2010, that were organized under subpart D of part II of chapter 598 of the general statutes prior to said date.
Sec. 3. (NEW) (Effective October 1, 2009) Any person having reason to believe that monetary contributions to a corporation organized under chapter 598 of the general statutes are being misappropriated and not being used for the purpose for which they were given may report that belief to the Attorney General. The Attorney General shall, pursuant to his authority under section 3-125 of the general statutes to represent the public interest in the protection of any gifts, legacies or devises intended for public or charitable purposes, investigate such report and take such action as he deems necessary.
This act shall take effect as follows and shall amend the following sections:
Section 1
October 1, 2009
33-279
Sec. 2
October 1, 2009
New section
Sec. 3
October 1, 2009
New section
Statement of Purpose:
To revise the corporate governance provisions applicable to the Roman Catholic Church and provide for the investigation of the misappropriation of funds by religious corporations.
[Proposed deletions are enclosed in brackets. Proposed additions are indicated by underline, except that when the entire text of a bill or resolution or a section of a bill or resolution is new, it is not underlined.]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Just a thought…there’s all this outrage about the bishop being ex-officio at the parish level, but if you look at the EXISTING LAW (below), that’s already how it is. I think you need to refine your views before you head up to Hartford and figure out what is really the problem with this bill. The drafters of the law are actually trying to require parishes to have boards of directors and allow individual parishioners access to records. The position of the bishop vis-à-vis the parish doesn’t really change much, from what I can see, unless the existing “ex officio” role of the bishop or his designee is materially different from “ex officio” and “without the right to vote.” Unfortunately, “ex officio” can mean with or without the right to vote, depending on the articles of incorporation of the entity, so this is unclear. That said, does the bishop actually vote on parish boards/councils with any regularity? And bear in mind, we’ve had actual acts of embezzlement by priests in this state, so there may indeed be reason to push for greater openness. The legislation may still be flawed, but you have to get beyond the gut reaction and formulate what you really want to say.
Sec. 33-279. Organization as corporation. A corporation may be organized in connection with any Roman Catholic Church or congregation in this state, by filing in the office of the Secretary of the State a certificate signed by the archbishop or bishop and the vicar-general of the archdiocese or of the diocese in which such congregation is located and the pastor and two laymen belonging to such congregation, stating that they have so organized for the purposes hereinafter mentioned. Such archbishop or bishop, vicar-general and pastor of such congregation and, in case of the death or other disability of the archbishop or bishop, the administrator of the archdiocese or diocese for the time being, the chancellor of the archdiocese or diocese and the pastor of such congregation shall be members, ex officio, of such corporation, and, upon their death, resignation, removal or preferment, their successors in office shall become such members in their stead. The two lay members shall be appointed annually, in writing, during the month of January from the lay members of the congregation by a majority of the ex-officio members of the corporation; and three members of the corporation, of whom one shall be a layman, shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.
If you'll notice, the original section 33-279 only incorporates section A. The new legislation will incorporate sections B-H, establishing a lay board of directors and making the pastor or bishop beholden to this lay board for financial and administrative matters. Big difference, that; and it is absolutely inexcusable. Laity has no place overriding the say of a pastor in any of the affairs of a parish, and to give a lay board the power to dictate how a parish's funds are to be spent - regardless of the nature of the expenditure - or to decide who to hire for what position - regardless of whether the one being hired has any real interest in promoting authentic Catholic belief and practice - is a complete undermining of the purpose of a pastor in the first place. Don't think this isn't being done without an eye towards silencing the Church's voice on moral matters - such as same-sex marriage - that the liberal Connecticut legislature would just as soon not be challenged on.
Transparency can be attained in many other ways...ways that do not result in an inevitable politicization of the governance of Catholic parishes in Connecticut. The Church is an apolitical entity for a reason. It should stay that way. What point is there to the First Amendment otherwise? This legislation is a thinly-veiled attempt to decapitate the Catholic Church in Connecticut.
Now, a thought for you...have the patience to read beyond the first paragraph of a statute to get the whole picture before rushing to post a condescending "gotcha" comment. It will serve you well.
UPDATE: Today (3/10/2009), the Connecticut legislature has tabled this proposed legislation. It will not be revisited during the current legislative session. It does, however, remain our responsibility to remain vigilant on this matter. The proponents of this bill clearly did not want this to receive the attention that it has, and it is certain that future attempts (and in this political climate, who really doubts that there WILL be future attempts?) will be made with as much stealth and as little fanfare as possible.
Post a Comment