Skip to comments.Loyola bans same-sex wedding ceremonies in new policy [Loyola University Chicago]
Posted on 02/22/2014 5:52:29 PM PST by Mrs. Don-o
Loyola University Chicago changed its guidelines for wedding ceremonies on campus, adopting an official policy ahead of Illinois' equal-marriage law on June 1. The new policy, enacted last December, only allows Catholic weddings in the university's Madonna della Strada Chapel. All other civil or religious weddings, including same-sex unions, are banned from campus facilities.
The decision also comes after a Loyola student launched a Change.org petition last September, urging university administrators to allow same-sex ceremonies on campus. Christine Irvine, a Loyola junior studying visual communication, started the petition after officials denied her request to use university facilities for her upcoming wedding. Irvine said there were no problems until officials learned she would marry a woman. To date, the petition has more than 2,900 signatures.
In her first interview about Loyola's new policy, Irvine told Windy City Times that the decision doesn't seem bad to anyone who may not know how it came about. She believes the university made the decision to specifically forbid same-sex ceremonies on campus.
"It's really disheartening," Irvine said. "It's a sign of the non-acceptance and non-tolerance of the LGBT students on campus ... a sign of disrespect of our love compared to our peers."
Before Loyola enacted its official policy last December, the university's standard practice welcomed ceremonies "legally recognized" in Illinois. But despite legal recognition of same-sex civil unions in Illinois, those ceremonies were still forbidden at Loyola venues.
Irvine said the distinction never made sense to her.
"I think they were struggling for a way to justify excluding same-sex couples from having their ceremonies on campus. And that was the best they could come up with," she said. "The discriminatory decision they made wasn't a policy at that point, it was just something they were choosing to do as an institution."
University officials haven't made a formal announcement about the new policy, but they share it on a case-by-case basis, according to a Loyola spokeswoman.
"It's the congruency with our Jesuit and Catholic tradition that caused us to implement this official policy as a result of the forthcoming Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act," said Maeve Kiley, Loyola's director of communication. "Our policy reflects our desire to reserve and use our facilities and campuses for rituals and ceremonies that are congruent with our obligations and values as a Jesuit, Catholic institution. That is why we are limiting weddings to Catholic ceremonies in our Catholic chapel."
Loyola's religious affiliation and mission affords the university exemptions granted under the equal-marriage law, which states that religious organizations are not required to provide their facilities for wedding ceremonies and receptions. The law also protects religious organizations from legal penalties for refusing to solemnize a marriage or rent religious facilities for receptions, should the type of ceremony contradict religious beliefs. Loyola still allows members of the public, including same-sex couples, to rent their venues for wedding receptions and other events.
However, the law's definition of "religious facilities" states that educational facilities are not exempt. With Loyola's standing as both a religious organization and an educational institution, there could be room for interpretation based on how the law is worded. But the wedding and reception venues offered by the university aren't necessarily used for educational purposes.
Kiley said that no current wedding ceremony reservations will be impacted by the new policy. On average, 20 ceremonies were hosted each year at university facilities other than the Madonna della Strada Chapel. Members of the public, including same-sex couples, can still rent Loyola venues for wedding receptions.
As for Irvine's wedding, she and her fiancee already made other plans for their June ceremony and reception. After Loyola rejected their request, the couple chose Firehouse Chicago at 1545 W. Rosemont Ave.
Irvine said she's disheartened that Loyola officials didn't extend the previous guideline to allow same-sex marriages, which will be legally recognized come June.
"[Loyola] claims to be a progressive institution having a commitment to social justice and I expected that they'd have no problem with it," Irvine said, adding that she feels community members were ready for a shift. "It's just disappointing that they had a good opportunity to show leadership and I honestly feel they failed the LGBT community."
Should stop most of it. Its not the same when you can’t desecrate a consecrated worship space.
They never should have permitted non-Catholic weddings.
My uncle was a Jesuit who lived there. He’s no longer with us, but he’d be cheering this along with us.
It’s not hard to imagine how this is all going to go down. We’ve seen this revolution before. In this case, the Catholic Church will be sued for ‘violating the human rights’ of the so-called LGBT community by not marrying them or accepting such ‘marriages’ among employees of the Church and its schools. Initially, the Church will mostly win on First Amendment grounds, but at some point the tide will turn... and then the Church will begin to lose... and eventually it will find itself outlawed as an enemy of the people like it was in 1930s Mexico, 1790s France, etc.
You can’t “ban” anything that doesn’t already exiat!!!
Wow, Jesuits think like I do.
Of course, my Jesuit “clock” was set long before Vatican II during the time that “SJ” stood for “Society of Jesus”.
IF one reads the history of England, one will find that ALL marriages were performed in churches, None were ever done by civil authorities in the time. The civil authorities then started requiring church duplicate records of church marriages for their own tax records. Later on this church function was usurped by the registration civil authorities as “ civil marriages” and the churches were bypassed. This was done that the civil authorities could make money by charging for both registration and marriages. They later even usurped more authority illegally by requiring “marriage licenses” before they could even get married IN CHURCH~!!!in order to raise even more tax revenues. check it out.
Marriage entries recorded the date and place of marriage. Information included the ages of the two parties, their residences, marital status, occupations, fathers,
and even their fathers’ occupations. Civil copies of marriage entries are duplicates of original church entries. Thus, since it was the duty of the minister to forward copies of all of the marriages he performed, the vast majority have been recorded at the civil
level, even in the early years of civil registration. However, always be sure to check the original church record since there are often discrepancies between the civil and ecclesiastical copies of the same record. Clerical errors happen! We blogged about
They required that only Catholics can be married there.
And this is strict, too.
Despite it being one of the most liberal schools in existence.
We were married by a S.J.
BTW, a VERY large gay student/faculty population, too.
In fact one of the counselors who took us through our pre-marital counseling was a huge flamer.
Nice man, though.
Good. Otherwise, they’d have to change their name to Gayola.
At the time,we thought it was wrong, but after a few years of reflection,I came to understand it was certainly and entirely their absolute right to refuse to officiate in a religion mocking ceremony for what amounted to two non-members of and disbelievers in their private church.
I didn't consciously intend to mock them, but if that church had consented to perform a solemn religious ceremony, empty of the sacrements the congregation believed in, that's exactly what we would have done.
There are plenty of options for civil officiates of “marriage ceremonies” that don't require any religious group to be forced to mock themselves by the government.
“It’s really disheartening,” Irvine said. “It’s a sign of the non-acceptance and non-tolerance of the LGBT students on campus ... a sign of disrespect of our love compared to our peers.”
IT’S DISHEARTENING TO HER BECAUSE THE SCHOOL IS KEEPING HER FROM USING HER LIPS AND TONGUE IN THE WRONG PLACE
When my son was baptized, my sister thought it would be "nice" if her son got baptized at the same time.
But even though she was also raised Catholic, and her hubby was raised Catholic, neither of them ever attend church.
In fact I'm pretty sure my sis is at best agnostic.
I gently told her it probably wouldn't be a good idea.
For Catholics this is a "big deal". One of the Sacraments.
Not to be taken lightly, or just something that one does without thinking.
First Cook County gay wedding ceremonies: ‘It’s historic’
Actually, they can still do whatever they want with their lips and tongues. They can have their vaginas transplanted to their foreheads for all anyone cares.
They just can't abuse our consecrated space and claim some kind of twisted-sister blessing.
The Obama Admin is on record as saying acceptance of Federal monies negates an organizations religious freedom argument.
Expect this to go to the USSC.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.