Admitting children of same-sex couples to Catholic elementary schools

  • Thread starter Thread starter GloriaPatri4
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Bella3502:
Nobody is excluded from the Church except by his or her own lifestyle choices.
Ok let’s see. “Lifestyle Choices” — hmmmmm

Let’s exclude:
  1. Married parents who use birth control.
  2. Any families who have only 1 or 2 children. They may be using birth control.
  3. Unmarried parents who use birth control.
  4. Single parents, because they are probably having sex and using birth control
  5. Single parents who appear to be living in a same sex household. (They are most likely gay and closeted.) If it walks, talks, and quacks like a duck…
Click to expand...
Dear Bella,

In most cases (probably 98%) of the examples that you give, these families are not publicly displaying their sin as is the case of two men or two women who are presenting themselves as a couple and family on a Catholic school campus.

1. Married parents who use birth control:

Not an obvious sin. Who would know which parents were using birth control?

2. Any families who have only 1 or 2 children. They may be using birth control.

It’s not a sin to only have had one or two children unless you are contracepting, and for all you know they may have been practicing NFP.

2. Unmarried parents who use birth control.
Not an obvious sin. I’m sure there are many unmarried parents at Catholic schools that use birth control but how would you know they were not married or using birth control unless they told you?

3. Single parents, because they are probably having sex and using birth control
Oh please.

4. Single parents who appear to be living in a same sex household. (They are most likely gay and closeted.) If it walks, talks, and quacks like a duck…

I know a few single parents that live in a same sex household and I have never thought they were gay because they don’t regularly show up on the school campus together, wear wedding rings, are listed as father and father or mother and mother in the school directory, or admit to being gay.
 
From
Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith
Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Unions

CONCLUSION
11. The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions. The common good requires that laws recognize, promote and protect marriage as the basis of the family, the primary unit of society. Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behaviour, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity. The Church cannot fail to defend these values, for the good of men and women and for the good of society itself.

The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, in the Audience of March 28, 2003, approved the present Considerations, adopted in the Ordinary Session of this Congregation, and ordered their publication.

Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, June 3, 2003, Memorial of Saint Charles Lwanga and his Companions, Martyrs.

**Joseph Card. Ratzinger **
Prefect

Angelo Amato, S.D.B.
Titular Archbishop of Sila
*Secretary *
Click to expand...
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexu al-unions_en.html
**
Click to expand...
 
40.png
NightRider:
Michael T:

Just because a Catholic school admits a child or children of homosexual parents it does not mean that said school is giving “official recognition” to homosexual parents. Actually, that school is giving recognition to people as people, not as sexual entities. I commend that school for doing so.
Click to expand...
NightRider:
When a Catholic school admits a child or children adopted by homosexual men living in a pseudo-marital union it creates confusion and leads poorly catechized people who wish to “change the Church” to fantasize that they are making inroads towards a change in Church teaching.

In so doing, they also confuse the young people at the school, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, because these men do act as though they are a married, showing up to pick up the children, volunteering in classrooms, coming to school functions as a couple, being listed as father and father (when neither of them is actually the father of these children since they’re adopted) and on and on. Kids are seeing this and it sends them a message, and if we are being honest here, that’s exactly the message these activist men and their supporters want to send, which is why they have joined this school in the first place.

You mentioned that the school’s enrollment of the children is not “official recognition”. I don’t care if the recognition is “official” or not. I am aware that homosexual unions will never get “official” recognition from Catholic schools, because homosexual unions are completely contrary to Catholic teaching and always will be, no matter how many people fantasize to the contrary.

As far as recognizing people as people, I was unaware of any Catholic teaching that homosexually oriented men and women are not people, therefore I am confused as to the significance of your point.
 
And just because you do not *see *the teacher sexually abusing the student doesn’t mean it is any less sinful than the sins you do see…so—as you *see, *whether sin is visible or invisible does not matter because *itis still sin. *

This is why it is only for the Lord to judge us. It is not up to me and it is not up to you, thank God.
 
Michael T.:
NightRider:
When a Catholic school admits a child or children adopted by homosexual men living in a pseudo-marital union it creates confusion and leads poorly catechized people who wish to “change the Church” to fantasize that they are making inroads towards a change in Church teaching.

In so doing, they also confuse the young people at the school, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, because these men do act as though they are a married, showing up to pick up the children, volunteering in classrooms, coming to school functions as a couple, being listed as father and father (when neither of them is actually the father of these children since they’re adopted) and on and on. Kids are seeing this and it sends them a message, and if we are being honest here, that’s exactly the message these activist men and their supporters want to send, which is why they have joined this school in the first place.

You mentioned that the school’s enrollment of the children is not “official recognition”. I don’t care if the recognition is “official” or not. I am aware that homosexual unions will never get “official” recognition from Catholic schools, because homosexual unions are completely contrary to Catholic teaching and always will be, no matter how many people fantasize to the contrary.

As far as recognizing people as people, I was unaware of any Catholic teaching that homosexually oriented men and women are not people, therefore I am confused as to the significance of your point.
Click to expand...
It is not the children who are confused, it is the *adults. *
**
The point I was trying to make about homosexuals being actual people is that many heterosexual people do not treat the homosexuals as people, they treat them like they are sub-human and *evil. *Children themselves know intrinsically that these people are not evil and that really seems to bother the adults. The children could care less if these men wear wedding rings, because teenagers in highschool often exchange wedding-type rings when they are going steady–even junior high aged teens do so, too. So what if those men wear rings??

Obviously, the administrators of this school in question and their local Archbishop realizes these things, too, and would prefer that the parents of this school get over their fears and obsessions about the sexuality of these men. Thank God.
 
40.png
NightRider:
Sin is sin, whether it is visible or invisible.
Click to expand...
Visible and invisible sins are both bad but how are invisible sins exposing others (especially children) to bad example and scandal?

From:

Admitting children of same-sex couples to Catholic elementary schools:
thinking beyond the clichés

By Dr. Edward Peters

Contraception, too, is a very serious matter, but it is addressed by moral and pastoral theology, not by canon law and ecclesiastical governance. Thus parental contraception, though objectively sinful, provides no basis for consequences upon children in the external forum. (I’m assuming that contracepting parents don’t drop their kids off at Catholic school in sports cars blazoned with bumpers stickers proclaiming “Contracepting and Proud!”). Ironically, the acceptance of contraception by large numbers of Catholic laity, to say nothing of overwhelming numbers of non-Catholics, is the tap root for the gross caricature of marriage that same-sex weddings represent. On that, read experts such as Pope Paul VI or Dr. Janet Smith.
 
40.png
NightRider:
Sin is sin, whether it is
visible or invisible.
Click to expand...
NightRider:

Is all sin equal? That’s not Catholic teaching. There is a distinction in Catholic teaching between mortal sin and venial sin. Moreover, there are degrees of sinfulness even in mortal sins. Someone who murders one person sins seriously. Someone else, who murders more people by one act, tens, hundreds, thousands, or millions, commits a greater sin.

Sin is sin, in the sense that all sin is offensive to God, and I applaud you for recognizing that, but some sins are worse because of the circumstances surrounding the action.

The Church teaches that the morality of human actions is considered by looking at three things: the act considered in itself (the object, or essential nature of the action) the circumstances, and the intentions.

In order for an action to be moral, the object of the act, the circumstances surrounding the act, and the intentions of the agent (the person performing the action) must be morally good. If any one of the three is evil, they pollute the act and render it morally wrong (i.e. sinful).

So giving money to the poor, which is morally good in itself, becomes sinful when the circumstance is that the money is stolen, or if the almsgiver’s family would not be able to eat because of the gift, etc.

Or the intention of the almsgiver may be evil. He may be a political official attempting to buy votes in order to become elected in order that he can further promote and secure abortion “rights” and other agendas pertaining to the culture of death. This would make the action evil.

Some acts, like murder, theft, kidnapping, adultery, rape, homosexual acts, masturbation, blasphemy, artificial contraception, and a number of other things are sinful by nature, or by definition, if you will. Such acts are said by Holy Mother Church to be intrinsically evil. They may never be done, regardless of circumstances or intentions.

Now, the circumstance here that adds to the gravity of already evil acts (homosexual union and the promotion of a social agenda that is destructive to society) is the circumstance of scandal.

Scandal is when we sin by our public example.

The couple in question is literally scandalizing others in that school by encouraging parents and children to become confused about the Catholic faith, and even joining the couple in their spiritual rebellion against the teaching of Christ’s Church.

Scandal makes this a very different sin than the other sins listed here as red herrings to divert attention from the topic at hand.

It is because of the sin of scandal that it was a grave error to allow these children to be enrolled under these circumstances.
 
Thank you for explaining that so well.

Bad example and scandal are sins against the soul included in the Fifth Commandment.

**I posted the quote below in another thread

**
From “My Catholic Faith” by Most Reverend Louis Laravoire Morrow (C) 1963:

What is BAD EXAMPLE?

Bad example is doing wrong in the presence of others.
  1. Bad example is the principal occasion of scandal, which is occasioning the sin of another by any word or deed having at least the appearance of evil. ***If ***any help or encouragement is given in any way to cause another to do wrong, scandal is committed or given.
Bad example and scandal are sins against the soul included in the Fifth Commandment. They injure our neighbor’s soul, and so are worse evils than injuring his body. They do the devil’s work and draw souls into hell. If by deliberate scandal and bad example we cause another to commit a grave sin, we are worse than murderers. St. Augustine said, If you persuade your neighbor to sin, you are his murderer."
  1. Our Lord condemned scandal in no uncertain terms, saying: ***“Woe to the man through whom scandal does come! ***And if thy hand or thy foot is an occasion of sin to thee, cut it off and cast it from thee! It is better for thee to enter life maimed or lame, than, having two hands or two feet, ***to be cast into the everlasting fire” ***(Matt. 18:7-8).
Grievous indeed must scandal be, to make our gentle Lord use such stroung words of condemnation. "The Son of man will send forth*** his angels***, and they will gather out of his kingdom all scandals and those who work iniquity, and cast them into the furnace of fire" (Matt. 13:41-42).
  1. Some ways*** of giving bad example or scandal are:*** by indecent talk, by selling or circulating bad books or pictures, by singing improper songs, by dressing immodestly, by appearing in public in a state of drunkenness, by profanity and cursing, by doing servile work publicly on Sunday, by behaving indecorously in church, by ridiculing religion and priests, by writing against religion, by publicly violating one of the commandments of God or the Church, etc.
We should be very careful in our actions, however innocent, so that they may not be the cause of scandal to others. “And if thy eye is an occasion of sin to thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee! It is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, than, having two eyes, to be cast into the hell of fire” (Matt. 18:9).
  1. By committing scandalous acts a person influences others to do the same. This is specially true of children, who easily imitate their parents and elders. He who gives scandal is like a man who digs a pit into which others fall, break their necks.
Click to expand...
 
WHAT MUST WE DO if we have been the occasion of scandal or bad example?
**From “My Catholic Faith”
Click to expand...
WHAT MUST WE DO if we have been the occasion of scandal or bad example?**
Click to expand...
If we have been the occasion of scandal or bad example, we are bound to repair the mischief done.
Click to expand...
A public scandal must be repaired in a public manner. Even then we usually cannot begin to repair the greater part of the evil we have caused.
Click to expand...
We must try our best to save those we have scandalized from the effects of our example. We must perform the contrary virtue, incite them by good example, and pray for them. We ought to be more careful about giving scandal, because of the difficulty, nay, almost the impossibility, of repairing the effects of scandal.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
NightRider:
It is not the children who are confused, it is the *adults. *
**
The point I was trying to make about homosexuals being actual people is that many heterosexual people do not treat the homosexuals as people, they treat them like they are sub-human and *evil. *Children themselves know intrinsically that these people are not evil and that really seems to bother the adults. The children could care less if these men wear wedding rings, because teenagers in highschool often exchange wedding-type rings when they are going steady–even junior high aged teens do so, too. So what if those men wear rings??

Obviously, the administrators of this school in question and their local Archbishop realizes these things, too, and would prefer that the parents of this school get over their fears and obsessions about the sexuality of these men. Thank God.
Click to expand...
NightRider:
Your words prove my point, and also demonstrate your own confusion. You seem to applaud the fact that innocence is confused when confronted with moral evil, and act as though the innocent confusion of children is a blessing of homosexual unions. You also equate an intrinsically disordered orientation that is ordered towards unnatural abuses of the sexual faculty created by God for the loving union of spouses and the generation of new life, new souls for God’s greater glory, with the exchange of rings between moony eyed teenagers?!

Moreover, your words indicate confusion about Church teaching. The Church never teaches that homosexuals are evil in themselves. The Church teaches, and has always taught that every human person has dignity and is of unfathomable value because they are loved by God, regardless of the state of their souls.

The Church doesn’t teach people to hate people. The Church correctly teaches people to hate sin, because sin can send people to hell forever.

I would applaud any efforts that were not sinful or of dubious theological intent to encourage Catholics and others to learn that it is wrong to hate other people for any reason.

I would disagree with the fantasy that promoting, condoning, tolerating, or embracing sinful choices as alternative lifestyles is the Christian way to go about teaching that it is wrong to hate anyone.
 
40.png
Princess_Abby:
Gloria, how many more polls and/or threads of nearly an identical nature should we expect? I think we’re all clear about the situation in Orange County, CA and I think you’ve gotten quite a response from the Catholic Answers community already.

Does anyone else think that creating eight different threads on the same subject is pushing an agenda?

Or is it just exercising her obsession, like NightRider said?
Code: 
 	 		 		  Poll:  			[**Should active homosexuals be permitted to flaunt their lifestyle at a CatholicSchool?**](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=45176) 			 		
 		  			 			 				GloriaPatri4

		 			Poll:  			[**Admitting children of same-sex couples to Catholic elementary schools**](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=51720) 			 		 	 		  			 			 				GloriaPatri4

		 			 			Poll:  			[Would you permit your child to attend a party in a gay household ?](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=49693) 			( http://forum.catholic.com/images/misc/multipage.gif  [1](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=49693&page=1)   [2](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=49693&page=2)    ) 		 	 		  			 			 				GloriaPatri4 			 		

		 			 			Poll:  			["Gay Friendly" Agenda Gaining Footholds in Catholic Schools Around The Country](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=43096) 			 		 	 		  			 			 				GloriaPatri4

		 			 			Poll:  			[THE ELEPHANT IN THE CHURCH  a Catholic priest speaks out against homosexual priests](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=40891) 			( http://forum.catholic.com/images/misc/multipage.gif  [1](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=40891&page=1)   [2](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=40891&page=2)   [3](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=40891&page=3)    ) 		 	 		  			 			 				GloriaPatri4

		 			 			Poll:  			["Gay Days" at Santa Rosa High](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=38502) 			( http://forum.catholic.com/images/misc/multipage.gif  [1](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=38502&page=1)   [2](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=38502&page=2)    ) 		 	 		  			 			 				GloriaPatri4
Should parents send their children to a party in a gay household? (Ask an Apologist) GloriaPatri4
Code: 
 	 		 		  			 				 				 				 			 			 			 			 			[Should active homosexuals be permitted to flaunt their lifestyle at a CatholicSchool? (Ask an Apologist)](http://forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=37304&highlight=homosexual) 			 		
 		  			 			 				GloriaPatri4
Click to expand...
Would that more people were obsessed with preventing the sin of scandal. The world would be a better place.

I think that a lot of the saints were persecuted for being fixated on holiness, perfection, and the avoidance of anything that impedes the soul’s progress to God.

I question the agenda of those who wish this issue to go away and threby allow the unacceptable status quo to continue unabated.
 
Michael T,

What a logical and reasoned approach you give us. Welcome and God Bless.
 
40.png
NightRider:
It is not the children who are confused, it is the *adults. *

The point I was trying to make about homosexuals being actual people is that many heterosexual people do not treat the homosexuals as people, they treat them like they are sub-human and *evil. *Children themselves know intrinsically that these people are not evil and that really seems to bother the adults. The children could care less if these men wear wedding rings, because teenagers in highschool often exchange wedding-type rings when they are going steady–even junior high aged teens do so, too. So what if those men wear rings??

Obviously, the administrators of this school in question and their local Archbishop realizes these things, too, and would prefer that the parents of this school get over their fears and obsessions about the sexuality of these men. Thank God.
Click to expand...
I am sorry, but this is secular reasoning and an attempt to minimize the grave consequenses of scandal. Each time public sin is pointed out someone plays the “hate” card and misdirects the conversation. No one hates homosexuals or any public sinner. What we hate is sin and what we want is to prevent scandal from stealing souls. That is what this is about, eternal souls.
 
40.png
GloriaPatri4:
Dear Bella,

In most cases (probably 98%) of the examples that you give, these families are not publicly displaying their sin as is the case of two men or two women who are presenting themselves as a couple and family on a Catholic school campus.

1. Married parents who use birth control:

Not an obvious sin. Who would know which parents were using birth control?

2. Any families who have only 1 or 2 children. They may be using birth control.

It’s not a sin to only have had one or two children unless you are contracepting, and for all you know they may have been practicing NFP.

2. Unmarried parents who use birth control.

Not an obvious sin. I’m sure there are many unmarried parents at Catholic schools that use birth control but how would you know they were not married or using birth control unless they told you?

3. Single parents, because they are probably having sex and using birth control

Oh please.

4. Single parents who appear to be living in a same sex household. (They are most likely gay and closeted.) If it walks, talks, and quacks like a duck…

I know a few single parents that live in a same sex household and I have never thought they were gay because they don’t regularly show up on the school campus together, wear wedding rings, are listed as father and father or mother and mother in the school directory, or admit to being gay.

Thank you… you made my point!!! I keep seeing these ridiculous polls that are not based in fact… They are based on “shunning” people ( and children) because of perception. That is just wrong and un-Christian.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Bella3502:
thank you… you made my point!!! I keep seeing these ridiculous polls that are not based in fact… They are based on “shunning” people ( and children) because of perception. That is just wrong and un-Christian.
Click to expand...
This is untrue. No one has called for shunning anyone. Why is it so hard to see love and truth versus compromise and acceptance of scandal?
 
40.png
fix:
This is untrue. No one has called for shunning anyone. Why is it so hard to see love and truth versus compromise and acceptance of scandal?
Click to expand...
Love and Truth versus Compromise and acceptance of scandal – **both open to individual interpretation. **

Whose? If you read these threads, there is quite a bit of variation.
 
40.png
Bella3502:
Love and Truth versus Compromise and acceptance of scandal – **both open to individual interpretation. **

Whose? If you read these threads, there is quite a bit of variation.
Click to expand...
Prudence is needed. Open homosexual conduct is a scandal. That is not subjective. Two men acting as husband and wife and adopting children and parading as a legitimate family is a scandal.

Telling folks who are authentically angered by such nonsense that they are shunning someone is uncalled for and not accurate.
 
I voted “other”.

It depends on the intent of the school administrators. I will bet there are some who would feel sympathetic to the “couple” and believe they deserve recognition as a regular family, in contrast to Church Teaching.

Personally, I would like to think that the concern is for the child. Like children conceived through rape or born out of wedlock, it is no fault of their own that they have been placed into that situation, nor do they have the ability to alter their circumstances. In the child’s best interest, they should be welcomed into the school but still taught what is right and wrong.

In other words, the school cannot water down its curriculum to show sensitivity to “alternative” viewpoints.
 
**NINE WAYS OF BEING AN ACCESSORY TO ANOTHER’S SIN
  1. by counsel**
    2. by command
    3. by consent
    4. by provocation
    5. by praise or flattery
    6. by silence
    7. by assistance/partaking
    8. by defense
    9. by concealment
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top