Catholic Teachers Protest Contracts That Ban “Sinful” Behavior

Several Catholic dioceses, including Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Oakland, have recently added “moral clauses” to their contracts with teachers. The contracts, which refer to teachers as “teacher-ministers,” prohibit them from engaging in behavior “contrary to Roman Catholic teaching.” Such behavior includes same-sex marriage, abortions, and sex outside marriage. Moreover, teachers with these moral clauses are prohibited from supporting positions which are contrary to Church teachings.

The dioceses defend these contracts by claiming that their teachers have always been ministers to youth and that the moral clauses merely clarify the Church’s position. However, many Catholic teachers are not Catholic. The Oakland diocese alone employs about a thousand non-Catholics. Many have quit or simply crossed out the “moral clause” of the contracts.

Not All Contracts Are Legal
The contracts written by the dioceses were created with certain legal developments in mind. Two years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that employees with religious duties aren’t covered by anti-discrimination laws. The outcome of that case is on full display today. Catholic dioceses are trying to protect themselves from lawsuits alleging discrimination by labeling all their teachers “ministers.”

If judges don’t examine the situation too closely, they might buy the idea that Catholic school teachers are ministers. Teachers are supposed to be role models to their students and parents sending their children to Catholic school expect their children to have a religious education. Parents expect prayers before classes begin, references to Catholic doctrine, and other religious exercises. On the other hand, not every Catholic school teachers will be in a position where they can pass religious teachings to their students, especially teachings regarding the political issues. A first grade teacher might lead prayers, but I would be surprised if the teacher had to talk about sex at all.

The point is that not all contracts will be enforced. For example, some home mortgages prohibit borrowers from filing bankruptcy, even though debtors cannot waiver the right to file for bankruptcy. Likewise, a contract which attempts to define nature of an employment does not mean the contract is right. Courts always have the final word on contract interpretation.

Employers Cannot Control What Their Employees Say Outside of Work
The most egregious aspect of these employment contracts is the restriction on public support of political issues like homosexuality and abortion. Although the Catholic Church is a private entity and thus not restricted by the First Amendment, judges are part of the government. Courts cannot enforce contracts which restrict a party’s free speech rights. California in particular has certain laws which could shut down any lawsuits brought to enforce these “moral contracts.” The Church can’t expect courts to enforce contract provisions which silence public participation. That is simply unconstitutional.

More importantly, Catholic school teachers are supposed to be role models for their students. If teachers simply obey Church doctrine without explaining to students why those doctrines exist, students would be less likely to follow those doctrines. Most judges and lawyers understand that laws have a purpose and that citizens are more likely to obey the law if they understand the rationale behind those laws. Secular society is built on the idea that we should embrace discussion of our laws rather than silence or crush dissenters. If the Church learns anything from secular society, it should be our policy of open discussion.