In Colorado, the separation of the Catholic Church from the state | MAES | Opinion

The framers of the United States Constitution could not have been clearer in their feelings about church-state relations. The First Amendment to the Constitution provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press: or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

Yet it is and will remain a controversial topic of discussion, especially given today’s divisive rhetoric about the role government should play in our daily lives.

In my hometown of Pueblo, as well as in the broader Catholic community in Denver, several scenarios regarding church-state relations are coming to the forefront right now that deserve consideration.

Chris Nicoll, a Republican and former city councilman, filed to fill vacancies on the Pueblo City Council. He was not elected to the position. As a result, in keeping with the Republican Party’s belief that most elections are somehow rigged or tainted, Nicoll alleged dishonesty and filed ethics complaints against two incumbent city councilmen, Dennis Flores and Regina Maestri, alleging they were “corrupt officials,” according to a June 2024 report by Lindsey Jensen.

Stay informed: Sign up to receive daily reviews in your inbox Monday-Friday

Flores is a Democrat and Maestri is a Republican, and both are opposed to Nicoll’s nomination. Although the city’s council elections claim to be nonpartisan, party affiliation in elections is the worst-kept secret in Pueblo.

Nicoll claims that his affiliation with a Christian religious organization called Forging Pueblo was a major reason Flores voted against him. Flores denies the accusations and questions why he, who claims Christianity is his religion of choice, would discriminate against his own religion.

Forging Pueblo is a Colorado nonprofit organization that states its goal is to significantly impact the Pueblo through a biblical worldview and believes its community outreach should include the following areas: church, business, government, education, media/news, arts/entertainment, and family. Forging Pueblo is actively involved in endorsing candidates for public office.

Even assuming that Flores voted against Nicoll because he is involved with Forging Pueblo, Nicoll prefers to ignore the fact that Forging Pueblo is a political force in the community and therefore fair game in distinguishing how its values ​​conflict with different political views. Forging Pueblo, for example, vigorously opposed the opening of an abortion clinic in Pueblo and won national support from the pro-life movement. Not surprisingly, their efforts were widely criticized by pro-choice advocates.

To suggest that this was an attack on their religious beliefs, because pro-choice people also feel strongly about their beliefs, completely ignores the fact that the Forging Pueblos, through their chosen spheres of influence and tangible involvement in state affairs, have opened the door to legitimate debate about their political beliefs. Therefore, Nicoll should not complain.

Forging Pueblo is not the only religious nonprofit that blurs the line between church and state involvement. The Catholic Church is an unabashed participant in partisan politics and should be held accountable for both its nonprofit status and its anti-Christian policies. Denver Archbishop Samuel Aquila has used his influence to repeatedly espouse homophobic and transphobic rhetoric.

Aquila played a key role in the publication of a 17-page document that specifically advised Catholic school administrators in the diocese to prohibit the admission of transgender and gender nonconforming parents and to treat same-sex parents differently than heterosexual couples. Because schools are private and technically receive no public funds, they are free to define the parameters of admission, including discriminating against students based on gender identity.

Aquila has said before, “Colorado is a very liberal state. Many of its people are socially liberal and have embraced secular humanism.” As a result, “The challenges for the church in this culture are great.” That certainly sounds like a political statement to me.

Because hypocrisy knows no bounds, the Archdiocese of Denver sued the state of Colorado for denying Catholic schools public funding for preschool because they violated the state’s nondiscrimination policy, which covers discrimination against any person based on sex. The state then removed the nondiscrimination clause from its universal preschool contract for the 2024-2025 school year.

Aquila and other Catholic Church leaders have taken it upon themselves to deny sacraments to politicians who profess the Catholic faith and are pro-choice in the abortion debate. Some Church leaders have made political speeches from the pulpit, endorsed political candidates, endorsed political platforms, and criticized in Church bulletins those accused of violating Church doctrine.

Let’s be clear: Church leaders have the right to exercise their right to free speech and protection in their publications regarding their personal political beliefs, as long as they do not do so on behalf of the Catholic Church. When they speak on behalf of the Church, they cross the line of separation of church and state and should lose their 501(c)(3) nonprofit protections and be required to pay taxes. They have essentially become a political action group and should be regulated and treated as such.

Although I have been a member of the Catholic Church for 78 years, I no longer tithe to the Catholic Church because of leaders like Aquila and those who choose to use the pulpit for political purposes. I believe I am justified in not tithing because I do not want to contribute to a political entity that does not necessarily represent my views of the world on social and political issues.

In short, politicians like Nicoll and Aquila should have no choice but to use their religious affiliation to protect themselves from political attacks while simultaneously using it to advance their personal and religious causes. When they choose to do so, they are subject to all the rhetoric that engulfs the political arena, including criticism of their political beliefs, dressed up as self-fulfilling protections of church dogma.

Dennis Maes served as a judge of the 10th Judicial District in Pueblo for 24 years and was chief judge for 17 of those years. He previously served as director of Pueblo County Legal Services, Inc.; as a public defender; and as an attorney in private practice.