Children and the church

MASSACHUSETTS adoption law puts the welfare of the child first, and so should Catholic Charities, the Catholic bishops of the state, and Governor Romney. The governor was wrong this week even to suggest the possibility that state law might be changed so that Catholic Charities could refuse to place children with qualified parents who are gay.

The state needs all the adoptive parents it can get, especially for older children in the custody of the Department of Social Services, which cares for those removed from their birth families for their own protection. Catholic Charities has been handling these adoptions skillfully for years under contract with the department.

In a statement this week, the bishops said Catholic Charities could no longer facilitate adoptions by same-sex couples. They contended that to insist otherwise is a violation of religious freedom. State antidiscrimination law contains a carefully drawn exemption for churches when it involves core religious functions. Adoption, however, is governed by civil law, and, as an agent of the state in these placements, Catholic Charities must not discriminate.

Romney told the bishops that he could not waive antidiscrimination laws by executive order. But it was disingenuous for him to even hint that the law might be changed to provide an exemption for the church. Romney ought to know that there is no chance that an exemption would be approved by the Legislature, nor should it be.

State adoption law and regulations are carefully designed so that anyone can apply to adopt a child, but the couple or person is checked by an adoption agency to make sure they will be good parents. Adoptive parents come in many varieties -- singles, couples with birth children of their own, those just starting a family, and those of the same or different genders.

The one common quality is a desire to bring love, care, and attention to a child who is not theirs by birth. The law was well constructed to match good parents with children in need of homes.

Seven members of the Catholic Charities board resigned to protest the bishops' decision to seek an exemption for the law. As prominent Catholic lay people, they were right to publicly express their dissent. The bishops need to know that members of the church will not quietly acquiesce in unjust policies promulgated by the hierarchy.

It's unclear what the bishops will do next. Going to court is one possibility, as is forcing the board to end all adoption work. But, before they act, the bishops need to ask themselves: What is so wrong with casting the net wide for parents who will gladly take up the burden and joy of caring for a child?