Thumb's Down: Mass. Church To Help Find School For Gays' Son

[XIX]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='18 May 2010 - 02:11 PM' timestamp='1274202679' post='2112857']
I agree, it is not about punishing anyone.

Besides, if the "gay couple" were truly serious about providing a good Catholic education for the child in question, they would agree to separate, which would have the double effect of allowing the child to be admitted to a Catholic school program, while also removing the child from an innately immoral home situation.
[/quote]
Play the ball, not the man. I don't know if the gay couple wants the child to b e educated in the Catholic faith, but that's not relevant. A Jehovah Witness doesn't come knocking on my door to find out why Catholicism is correct, but I'd still do my best to evangelize given the situation. I wouldn't kick them off of my property, because that would be bad for my faith. Likewise, this gay couple may want no part of Church teaching. Give it to them anyway.

As far as the semantics behind calling it a punishment--it's hard to develop a counter-argument or understand your position when you don't offer a crumb of supporting evidence. But clearly, the child is paying dearly for the sins of his parents.

It would not be conducive to evangelization if we confined Catholic education to those who are already devoted Catholics.

Edited May 18, 2010 by XIX

[XIX]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='18 May 2010 - 01:46 PM' timestamp='1274201207' post='2112820']
I have worked at two different Catholic high schools and both of them held that when they admitted a child to the school as a student they were also admitting the family to the school as a part of the support network for all the members of the educational community, which is why neither school would admit students whose parents advocated (through word or deed) a position in opposition to Catholic doctrine.

A good Catholic school program is not simply about providing a good education to its student members; rather, it is about providing a good [i]Catholic[/i] education to both students and their families, which includes more than simply attending classes on the part of the student. The school should have a holistic approach to each student's development in which it serves the whole person, and not merely his intellect. This approach includes the parents and even the siblings of the student.
[/quote]
It's always amazed me how peoples' personal experience can vary greatly. My high school was effective at evangelization precisely because we allowed people from all areas of the spectrum to attend. And then they'd have us all listen to an entire Jason Evert speech, pray before every class, etc. Personally, I had tremendous opportunities to evangelize my friends who treated women poorly. I wouldn't have had the same chances in the high schools you were at.

Some schools may be better off creating a sterilized environment that is free from heresy and that's great if you can pull it off, but it's not for every school. Some schools are better served with a Steubenville-type of expectation that pretty much everyone's lives are dominated by Catholicism. To be honest, I suspect that the vast majority of all Catholic schools would be forced to shut down due to a lack of funding if they held themselves to such standards. Others have more of a missionary aspect or spreading the Gospel to the masses.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='XIX' date='18 May 2010 - 12:22 PM' timestamp='1274206932' post='2112887']
Play the ball, not the man. I don't know if the gay couple wants the child to b e educated in the Catholic faith, but that's not relevant. A Jehovah Witness doesn't come knocking on my door to find out why Catholicism is correct, but I'd still do my best to evangelize given the situation. I wouldn't kick them off of my property, because that would be bad for my faith. Likewise, this gay couple may want no part of Church teaching. Give it to them anyway.

As far as the semantics behind calling it a punishment--it's hard to develop a counter-argument or understand your position when you don't offer a crumb of supporting evidence. But clearly, the child is paying dearly for the sins of his parents.

It would not be conducive to evangelization if we confined Catholic education to those who are already devoted Catholics.
[/quote]
We had several non-Catholic students, but again those families understood that they were putting their child into a Catholic school, and that they were not to say or do things that would cause scandal within the school community. None of those families had a problem with this policy.

So as I said, if the "gay couple" wants to send the child in question to a Catholic school they will need to abide by the moral discipline of the Church. There is no right to attend a private Catholic school.

Edited May 18, 2010 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='XIX' date='18 May 2010 - 12:31 PM' timestamp='1274207467' post='2112893']
. . .

Some schools may be better off creating a sterilized environment that is free from heresy and that's great if you can pull it off, but it's not for every school. . . .
[/quote]
I am disturbed by your comments. Creating a moral environment within a Catholic school has nothing to do with being "sterile"; instead, it concerns being faithful to Christ.

Edited May 18, 2010 by Apotheoun

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='XIX' date='18 May 2010 - 02:22 PM' timestamp='1274206932' post='2112887']
I don't know if the gay couple wants the child to b e educated in the Catholic faith, but that's not relevant.
[/quote]
Yes, it is VERY relivent. Catholic schools are not meant to be superior institutions of academia... they are intended to preserve and nurture the Catholic faith.

[quote]
But clearly, the child is paying dearly for the sins of his parents.

It would not be conducive to evangelization if we confined Catholic education to those who are already devoted Catholics.
[/quote]
How is sending the child to a public school or another private school a punishment (especially if, as you imply above, they are not sending them to school to receive an education in the Catholic faith anyway)?

Why not close all the Catholic schools and send all the Catholic children out to public schools, if their purpose in life is to evangelize without being properly catechized.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' date='18 May 2010 - 12:53 PM' timestamp='1274208810' post='2112916']
. . .

Why not close all the Catholic schools and send all the Catholic children out to public schools, if their purpose in life is to evangelize without being properly catechized.
[/quote]
I would give a +1 but I do not have any left today.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Semper Catholic' date='17 May 2010 - 07:57 PM' timestamp='1274140650' post='2112312']
LOL is this guy for real?

Yeah there's just a bunch of evil gay leaders in and underground state room somewhere tenting their fingers, and tactically planning how to destroy the Catholic Church.
[/quote]


[quote name='rhetoricfemme' date='17 May 2010 - 07:50 PM' timestamp='1274140229' post='2112302']
Really? I don't think there is any sort of gay militia with their sights set on destroying the Church. I doubt these parents are using their child to bring down the Church. If there are, "militant gays," who are out to destroy Catholicism, then I can't imagine what the rest of the world is also doing to plot against us. I might as well not go outside ever again.[/quote]
No, there's not (at least as far as I'm aware) a bunch of gays in an underground lair plotting Dr. Evil-like how to blow up the Vatican or such.

However, there is a very real and very active "gay rights" lobby which does actively oppose any teaching that homosexual activity is in fact immoral and disordered. Such people oppose the Church and her moral teachings from both within and without the Church.
The world today (including but not limited to homosexuals) is very much opposed to the true Catholic message, and if we deny that, we're merely sticking our heads in the sand.


[quote]I'm sure gay folks are probably just as annoyed about the closed-minded bigots who link these priests to homosexuality. It's assuming that homosexuality and pedophilia are the same thing, which they most definitely are not. Not to mention it paints a sad picture of our priests that end up becoming the butt of many jokes.[/quote]
However, the truth is that the vast majority of the sexual abuse by Catholic priests did in fact involve homosexuality. According to the [url="http://www.usccb.org/nrb/johnjaystudy/"]John Jay report[/url], most of the abuse involved priests engaging in homosexual pederasty with adolescent boys.

Most of it was [i]not[/i] true pedophilia, which involves pre-pubescent children, and is statistically just as likely to involve little girls.

I know it's politically correct to assert that the sexual abuse had absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality, but the facts say otherwise.

And who cares if people make ignorant jokes? Are you insinuating that homosexual priests are a "sadder picture" than pedophile priests?

[quote]Perhaps the child is meant to be a beacon for his parents to find Truth and enter the Church.


I know it doesn't always work this way, but I would really hope that teachers within our Catholic schools would speak firmly but sensitively of homosexuality in the first place. For the most part, no one is choosing to have feelings for the same sex. And I would be embarrassed and ashamed if I ever heard my son speaking cruelly or insensitively about homosexual people. He would absolutely never hear it within our home or any of the books/movies/music we provide him with. So he'd either be hearing it from friends and/or at school. In which case, I would say somewhere along the line someone failed him.

[/quote]
It's a shame young children should be learning about such sexual perversion at all at such a tender age.
Of course, a school with "parents" that are openly living that perverted lifestyle will likely force such issues into the classroom itself.
The parents would no doubt put pressure on the school to deny or avoid teaching the Catholic position regarding homosexuality.
This isn't about refusing to evangelize, or punishing children, but about a school being able to retain a truly Catholic identity and teaching.
The school is within its rights to avoid such problems.

Edited May 18, 2010 by Socrates

[Socrates]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='18 May 2010 - 02:55 PM' timestamp='1274208952' post='2112919']
I would give a +1 but I do not have any left today.
[/quote]
Ditto.

[rhetoricfemme]

[quote name='Socrates' date='18 May 2010 - 03:07 PM' timestamp='1274209667' post='2112926']
However, there is a very real and very active "gay rights" lobby which does actively oppose any teaching that homosexual activity is in fact immoral and disordered. Such people oppose the Church and her moral teachings from both within and without the Church.
The world today (including but not limited to homosexuals) is very much opposed to the true Catholic message, and if we deny that, we're merely sticking our heads in the sand.
[/quote]
Fair enough, I can't argue with that.

[quote]
However, the truth is that the vast majority of the sexual abuse by Catholic priests did in fact involve homosexuality. According to the [url="http://www.usccb.org/nrb/johnjaystudy/"]John Jay report[/url], most of the abuse involved priests engaging in homosexual pederasty with adolescent boys.

Most of it was [i]not[/i] true pedophilia, which involves pre-pubescent children, and is statistically just as likely to involve little girls.
[/quote]
I suppose the problem I have is with other individuals not bothering to learn the difference between homosexuality and pedophilia. People like to take a headline, or something they heard another person say and then just run with it, whether or not they're correct.

[quote]
I know it's politically correct to assert that the sexual abuse had absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality, but the facts say otherwise.

And who cares if people make ignorant jokes? Are you insinuating that homosexual priests are a "sadder picture" than pedophile priests?
[/quote]
I could care less about what is or isn't politically correct. If the church abuse had something to do with homosexuality, then okay. It is what it is. But if pedophilia was also involved, then eventually it just happens that one gets associated with the other. Which I already mentioned I take issue with.

And I do care about ignorant and tasteless jokes. About priests, disabled people, racial jokes, etc. Perhaps I just have a weak sense of humor. I don't even like blonde jokes.

And no, I'm not insinuating that homosexual priests paint a sadder picture than pedophile priests.

[quote]
It's a shame young children should be learning about such sexual perversion at all at such a tender age.
Of course, a school with "parents" that are openly living that perverted lifestyle will likely force such issues into the classroom itself.
The parents would no doubt put pressure on the school to deny or avoid teaching the Catholic position regarding homosexuality.
This isn't about refusing to evangelize, or punishing children, but about a school being able to retain a truly Catholic identity and teaching.
The school is within its rights to avoid such problems.
[/quote]
It is a shame that children learn about anything of a sexual nature at such an age, yes. And while I understand the need to protect a Catholic school's choice in accepting or denying students on a basis of someone choosing to live in their sins, I don't think the child is the one who needs to suffer for it.

If the parents are known to be in an active homosexual relationship, then perhaps upon enrollment of the child, they should be made aware that neither the school nor the church is going to make special accommodations to insinuate that the act of homosexuality is accepted. Church teaching is church teaching, and this is a church school.

Actually, the child is going to suffer regardless of what the school's decision is. If the child isn't allowed to attend the Catholic school, then he or she is being denied a (hopefully) solid Catholic education that should be a safe place to grow in their faith. When the times comes, they would learn that homosexuality does not jive with the Church, and while this is likely to be a confusing and possibly hurtful time, it is the truth. The truth sometimes hurts. But as I originally stated, what if this child is supposed to be a beacon for for their parents to come to Christ the right way?

While it's not fair for the parents to put their child in such a position, I'm not going to assume they're being ignorant or trying to force the Catholic school to, "be more accepting of peoples' differences." I make no assumptions about their intentions. For all I know, it's a cry for help from the parents. I'm not saying that justifies anything they're doing, but it's just a suggestion.

There is no reason that the issue of gay parents needs to be handled maliciously. There is room for honesty, love and discipline here. And if the parents are trying to enroll their child in a Catholic school, and that child grows in their Catholic faith, what else could the parents expect than to one day hear from their child questions about their marriage?

The alternative is for the child to be denied admittance to the Catholic school, where they may be left to wonder what they did wrong that the school of their chosen faith has told them they cannot attend. To me, that seems like a much deeper brand of hurt to recover from.

Edited May 18, 2010 by rhetoricfemme

[MissyP89]

So, let me get this straight. A couple is on birth control, or not attending Mass, or remarried, and the Church won't offer the child the opportunity to learn salvific Truth because it would cause too much drama for the school?

Edited May 18, 2010 by MissyP89

[BG45]

[quote name='MissyP89' date='18 May 2010 - 06:08 PM' timestamp='1274220523' post='2113122']
So, let me get this straight. A couple is on birth control, or not attending Mass, or remarried, and the Church won't offer the child the opportunity to learn salvific Truth because it would cause too much drama for the school?
[/quote]

Seems to be the gist of what some here are saying...

[CatherineM]

[quote name='MissyP89' date='18 May 2010 - 05:08 PM' timestamp='1274220523' post='2113122']
So, let me get this straight. A couple is on birth control, or not attending Mass, or remarried, and the Church won't offer the child the opportunity to learn salvific Truth because it would cause too much drama for the school?
[/quote]
When my mom and dad showed up to school functions, no one knew they weren't married. If they had used birth control, they wouldn't have been wearing a sign proclaiming it. If a lesbian couple shows up, it is kind of hard to hide that in a way that kids don't ask questions about things they shouldn't be worried about in grade school.

[Mark of the Cross]

oops

Edited May 18, 2010 by Mark of the Cross

[MissyP89]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='18 May 2010 - 05:27 PM' timestamp='1274221674' post='2113137']
When my mom and dad showed up to school functions, no one knew they weren't married. If they had used birth control, they wouldn't have been wearing a sign proclaiming it. If a lesbian couple shows up, it is kind of hard to hide that in a way that kids don't ask questions about things they shouldn't be worried about in grade school.
[/quote]

This makes a lot of sense and is a fair point. Thanks, Catherine.

[SaintOfVirtue]

[quote name='XIX' date='18 May 2010 - 04:58 AM' timestamp='1274183881' post='2112686']
I'll just say this: punishing the kids for the sins of their parents is quite puzzling to me. Punishing anyone by denying them a Catholic education is warranted if they have done something to deserve expulsion, for example. But to punish Person A because Daddy A and Mommy B are not following Church teaching? I don't get it.
[/quote]

It should not be viewed as a punishment, but as a preemptive defense against the inevitable lawsuits that are sure to come. (I'll explain in a moment, keep reading)

[quote name='XIX' date='18 May 2010 - 04:58 AM' timestamp='1274183881' post='2112686']
Jesus ate with tax collectors, absolved & befriended a prostitute, called Judas to be an apostle, called Peter to be his first Pope [i]after [/i]he denied Christ three times, healed on the Sabbath, and died a torturous death in public. Any one of these things can be interpreted by the haters as a chance to smear Christ's name, and they often took that chance. Nevertheless, He kept doing these things because it was the right thing to do.
[/quote]

Yes, but all of these examples you present are of [i]truly repentant sinners[/i]. Jesus did not eat with [i]unrepentant[/i] prostitutes, He did not eat with [i]fraudulent[/i] tax collectors; in fact Jesus violently rebuked real sinners and [i]and chased them out of His Father's House with a whip of chords[/i]! (John 2:15 or there abouts).

[quote name='XIX' date='18 May 2010 - 05:01 AM' timestamp='1274184065' post='2112687']
Will it be awkward and even hurtful when the boy has to learn about the sixth commandment? Of course it will. But it's our job to promote Church teaching, even when it inevitably makes other people get squirmy. Better to get conflicting ideas than to get a consistent message that gay relationships are okay. Besides, being exposed to Church teaching will help the boy see past a lot of the strawman arguments (The Church hates gay people, the Church condemns all gay people to Hell, etc. etc.) It's awkward, but it's better than not being exposed to Church teaching.
[/quote]

This is where I see lawsuits popping up like daisies. Homosexuals do not exactly have a good track record of NOT suing people or organizations that speak out against them. I sincerely believe that as soon as 'junior' comes home talking about what he learned of daddy A's and daddy B's immoral lifestyle; they will be on the phone to their attorney and the media stations faster than you can say "Proposition 8". If these people truly had any interest at all in a Catholic education then they would have reformed their lives to be more in line with Catholic teaching. Essentially they are saying to God, "I accept your will, Lord, but I will accept it on MY terms. Not yours." When we are all called to say to God, "I accept you will, Lord, and I will accept it on YOUR terms."


[quote name='XIX' date='18 May 2010 - 05:01 AM' timestamp='1274184065' post='2112687']
May I ask how barring them from entering would defend or promote anybody's morality?
[/quote]

It defends the image of the Roman Catholic Church as an unbending pillar of truth, that does will not comprise its Truth for the sake of what is publicly popular.