The only comment the parents have made was that when the children were baptised, they promised to rear them in the Catholic faith.
The very fact that they still call themselves a couple, still call both of themselves the “parents,” plural, of the child, is clear demonstration that despite promises, they are not “rearing them in the Catholic faith.”
If one was to be casuistic about it, there is no evidence that the parents commit homosexual acts. It’s just assumed.
People would stop assuming if, as another poster has suggested on this topic, the “couple” disengaged with each other, lived apart, and the biological mother took custody of the child, raising the child as millions of single straight mothers do, legitimately, and send those children to Catholic schools without controversy.
It does prove though that it’s all about appearance, not actual sin.
No, it shows that language matters, first of all. What is understood by the term “couple,” when linked with “lesbian,” is sexually charged. When then combined with “family” or “parenthood,” the hugely public statement (not private sin) is that we, the couple are redefining marriage & parenthood for you, the Catholic Church. We shall be in your face enough about it to enroll, as a family, “our” child, in your institution which cannot accept such a definition of family, nor can teach that definition to our child.
Christ was not particularly enamoured of those who made a great show of piety, while remaining sinful in private, and condemning those who only appeared to be sinful.
What he particularly hated was those who merely associated with a religious following, while not practicing that religion
deeply, in all the ways required, not just the flowery ways, the comfort ways, the sentimental ways. His was a tough love, tough for straights, tough for religious authorities. It was radical in a whole variety of ways, including renunciation of lifestyles that promoted sin. He never approved of individual sin just because religious authorities were also sinning.
