Legal but Unethical? This Catholic School Fired a Pregnant Teacher for Sex Outside Marriage

Religion Unplugged believes in a diversity of well-reasoned and well-researched opinions. This piece reflects the views of the author and does not necessarily represent those of Religion Unplugged, its staff and contributors.

(OPINION) The Supreme Court of New Jersey has agreed to hear a case, Victoria Crisitello vs. St Theresa School, about an unmarried Catholic school teacher who was dismissed from her position because she became pregnant through engaging in premarital sex. Seven years ago, art teacher Victoria Crisitello was fired by St. Theresa School when the school administration learned she was expecting a child.

Crisitello sued the school for discrimination. Twice, a state appeals court upheld a ruling for Crisitello, holding the faith-based school’s dismissal of the teacher was illegal discrimination. However, the state Supreme Court recently decided to take up the case after the school appealed to the court, claiming the case could have deep reverberations for “the fundamental freedom of religion.”

How a Recent US Supreme Court Precedent Impacts this Case

St. Theresa School claims that the dismissal of the teacher was not illegal discrimination based on sex (adverse employment actions taken against pregnant women due to their pregnancy generally fall under the sex discrimination protected class).

Rather, the school claims that the 2020 Supreme Court ruling in Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru affirms their freedom to hire teachers without government scrutiny. St Theresa School argues this recent precedent further bolsters their case and reaffirms their religious freedom to make religious employment decisions based on the ministerial exemption. The ministerial exemption bars the government from imposing restrictions on the selection of ministerial workers in religious institutions.

In Our Lady, the Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision that the government cannot interfere with religious institutions’ ability to select teachers providing devotional religious instruction, meaning religious schools can ensure they hire teachers who align with their spiritual commitments.

Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket, who argued the case to the Court, said at the time: “The last thing government officials should do is decide who is authorized to teach Catholicism to Catholics or Judaism to Jews. We are glad the Court has resoundingly reaffirmed that churches and synagogues, not government, control who teaches kids about God.”

Should a Catholic School Be Exempt from Nondiscrimination Laws when Firing a Pregnant Catholic Teacher?

The question of whether St. Theresa School is exempt from any government scrutiny with respect to Crisitello’s firing is complex and also fact-dependent. Was it clear that pre-marital sex was prohibited conduct? Did the Catholic school treat Crisitello differently than other employees merely because her violation of sexual conduct standards was easier to detect through her pregnancy? Was Crisitello engaged in devotional instruction? The facts present a somewhat jumbled picture.

New Jersey Superior Court documents state that St. Theresa School relied on “mere observation” that Crisitello was pregnant and unmarried in determining she had violated the school’s prohibition on immoral conduct. The Court notes the school had “never made any inquiry of any employee as to whether they were pregnant, unmarried, engaged in premarital sex, divorced, or otherwise violated any of the Church's doctrines.”

However, the facts here appear somewhat murky. It is unclear whether the Archdiocese of Newark (which oversaw the school) did or did not treat Crisitello differently than other employees merely because evidence of her sexual conduct was made manifest in her pregnancy. National Review noted the school’s principal confirmed in “depositions that she had not made efforts to determine if other staff members were engaged in extramarital sex.” However, St. Theresa School stated in a petition to the court that another school within the Archdiocese of Newark had fired a male teacher for impregnating his girlfriend.

Whether the school could have been more clear in its faithful conduct standards is also up for debate. The court records state that St. Theresa School, neither in its faith-based code of ethics nor its handbook standards of conduct “expressly addressed premarital sex as a prohibited conduct.”

Rather, the Court states that the Catholic school required all its “lay, faithful teachers” to engage in conduct that was not "contrary to the discipline and teachings of the Catholic Church... or harm to the ministry of the Catholic Church."

Further, St. Theresa School’s employee handbook required teachers to conduct a "value-centered approach to living and learning in their private and professional lives." All staff members were also required to "integrate culture, faith, and life through the teachings of all subject areas in the light of the Gospel so that the children can become 'good Christians and honest citizens.’"

So What?

It may be reasonable to assume that teachers within Catholic schools should know that sex outside of heterosexual marriage is against the precepts of the Catholic Church. And yet, it is also reasonable to hope that a Catholic school which would fire an employee for engaging in sexual conduct would, as part of their own Christian witness, make their faith-based standards of conduct for employees as explicit and transparent as possible.

As I write this, I am 28 weeks pregnant with my third child. I have also spent most of the past decade since graduating from law school advocating for both religious freedom and holistically pro-life public policies like worker protections for pregnant women and paid family leave. This case brings up challenging questions and interests that may, at first glance, seem to be at odds.

And yet, protecting pregnant workers and advancing institutional religious freedom is not a zero-sum game. Regardless of the New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision in this case, it is important to remember that advocating for religious freedom and supporting vulnerable pregnant women/nascent life are both integral and sacred principles within a historic Christian faith.

In this case, especially based on the uncertainty in some of the facts, Christians of good faith can disagree about whether the Catholic school should be exempt from government scrutiny.

In this case, I personally believe this Catholic school could and should have treated Ms. Crisitello differently. I believe that they could have been clearer about their standards of conduct. I believe they could have applied their standards more equitably to all teachers. And I believe they could have been more supportive of her when she decided to keep her unborn child rather than aborting the baby, even though it put her livelihood at risk. And yet, I still believe St. Theresa’s - and all religious entities engaged in spiritually forming children in a particular faith tradition - have the freedom to discern who is qualified and equipped to do such spiritual formation.

So, although I am inclined to defend the school’s religious freedom to legally and constitutionally take adverse action against a teacher that has violated their faith standards, it does not mean I always ethically or theologically agree with what they do. As I wrote in another article: “The old adage ‘just because you can doesn’t mean you should’ surely has a place in a discussion among spiritual communities about whether they should” engage in certain conduct.

Yet, the First Amendment standard for religious freedom requires us to move beyond only defending it when we agree with the religious actions of an individual or institution. We are called to advocate for religious freedom not only when we share theological truth claims with an individual or institution, but even and especially when we disagree. And we can recognize that theological/ethical disagreement should not always translate into government intervention.

Chelsea Langston Bombino is a believer in sacred communities, a wife, and a mother. She serves as a program officer with the Fetzer Institute and a fellow with the Center for Public Justice.