Contract Urges Catholic School Teachers to Live Moral Teachings

  • Thread starter Thread starter CWM31
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If someone is not repentant, we must let them go. I am not splitting hairs! I am worried that a legal contract will leave little room for truly repentant persons. .
The sinful teacher is welcome to return to Mass and interact with all the rest of us sinners but she doesn’t get her job back.

Lisa
. I’d also encourage the spirit instead of the letter of the law in practice. Thank you for the clarification!
I think there is a misunderstanding. In the article, I read.
The expanded 24-page contract spells out what the Catholic church means when it says “morally pure.”
“It affects the sense of what the church teaches regarding what is a marriage. It teaches about adultery and its inappropriateness,” Rockers said.
It also outlines the church’s view on same-sex marriage. Rockers said the document will not be used as a tool to fire teachers.
“The church wants to be unambiguous about what the moral teachings are so those teachers can know what they’re saying yes to when they say, ‘I want to be a minister as a teacher in a Catholic school,’” he said.
There is nothing about firing the repentant. This is a teaching tool to clarify what makes a teacher a bad role model. If this works like most rules in the workplace, then discipline is on a sliding scale with termination occurring for only the most egregious offenses or after multiple offenses.
 
I think this sort of falls into the discussion of catholic teachers, these seem to be from the perspective of the teachers.

atheists who teach religion in catholic schools: THis is from reddit so there might be language in the comments

“It should be noted that my course load includes an 11th grade religion class.”
reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/q7rja/iama_atheist_high_school_teacher_who_teaches_at_a/

(Mexico)
“OK! I am an ESL teacher in a Catholic school at one of the most violent cities in Mexico.”

reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/ohgv2/iama_atheist_teacher_at_a_catholic_middle_school/

(Canada)
“I was raised catholic but became a agnostic/atheist early in high school.”

reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/ngzzb/iama_atheist_who_is_also_a_catholic_school/
 
Some of the reddit comments are pretty unintelligible and/or humerous! An interesting read for sure! I certainly would be concerned about someone who actively taught atheism as an acceptable alternative. I think common sense is required here as in most things. I was taught by several non-Catholic teachers in high school, but they all taught secular subjects. Divisive social issues didn’t come up in geometry and calculus. In elementary school, I was also taught by a few non-Catholics, but they followed the standard Catholic curriculum (I think based on catechesis of the Good Shepherd?). I mean in a first grade classroom you’re probably not teaching advanced theology. Obviously, if a teacher is telling children they shouldn’t be Catholic, it’s a whole different matter. But, my protestant first grade teacher was excellent, instilled a love for the Lord, and may believe differently but is still a sister in Christ. I do hope this document is really pastoral in nature, but I worry that based on recent news stories it will be used as more than a document for correction. If I was interpreted by anyone as saying that teachers should be able to do whatever they want, I really don’t mean this. I just worry that when we start to get dictatorial, even when perfectly legal, we have to be really careful to avoid hypocrisy. The sexual abuse example wasn’t meant as a “jab” at the Church. It just highlights ongoing concerns I have with clergy accountability. While several priests who I knew as a child did have credible allegations against them (two admitted to the allegations, including the priest who married my parents), none of my teachers were ever subversive or accused of abuse. It “felt” to me like we were trying to hold teachers accountable for sins that are less directly damaging to children, while diocese are still publicly shielding clergy. I mean one diocese recently “lost track” of a priest who was banned from active ministry by a judge but was found working with a youth group under the supervision the same bishop. I just want to see everyone held to high standards along with multiple attempts made to soften hearts before severing relationships. It is not to be disrespectful to the Church but out of concern over how power and control can corrupt institutions.
 
I have a completely secular analogy to this. There is at least one hospital I know of that does not allow its employees to smoke tobacco products, even on private time. It actually requires prospective applications to pass a drug test for tobacco (yes, such does exist) in order to even get hired. This is regarding a completely legal substance, and as far as I know, Catholic moral theology does not regard cigarette smoking “in moderation” as a sin, although you could argue that there is no such thing as “moderation” when it comes to cigarettes because (unlike alcohol) there are no health benefits to moderate tobacco use as far as I know.

Now, part of this may merely be the hospital not wanting to pay for health insurance that will wind up being used to pay for treatment of tobacco-related diseases. But I also know that many health care workers DO smoke, yet are supposed to be counseling patients NOT to smoke; I have come across nurses and other HCWs who absolutely REEK of cigarette smoke. I know that even many doctors still smoke, although I am sure much less do than used to, say, 30 years ago.

I am sure many of them actually are trying to quit themselves, and some might be able to give great testimonies of how they regret ever trying cigarettes and how tobacco has affected their lives negatively. However, I suspect many, perhaps most, patients would see such people as hypocrites and wouldn’t take anti-smoking messages too seriously coming from people who smoke themselves. And this is assuming most such people wouldn’t be actively trying to extol the virtues of smoking to the patients.
 
This is the way it should be! Specially read paragraph 3.3 in the contract.
That’s more like it. Shame on California liberal “Catholics”. Way to go, Hawaii!!
 
This is the way it should be! Specially read paragraph 3.3 in the contract.
That’s more like it. Shame on California liberal “Catholics”. Way to go, Hawaii!!
Testing and crisis are hard, but it makes separating the sheep from the goats easier.
 
Testing and crisis are hard, but it makes separating the sheep from the goats easier.
Yes, exactly. It is not so much the fact that individuals fall short of teachings; it is the resistance to being asked to follow them. When I returned to the Church as an adult, this was a huge stumbling block for me. I did disagree with some stuff (it was birth control to be specific). I just find all of this kind of ironical; I really agonized over my “difference of opinion”. Even then I admitted to myself the Church was right; I knew I was in the wrong. The Church is supposed to strengthen us to overcome our will to sin; we don’t impose our will on the Church. IMHO.
 
Yes, exactly. It is not so much the fact that individuals fall short of teachings; it is the resistance to being asked to follow them.
Yup. The precursor to Jesus was/is repentance. The key to repentance is acknowledgment of sin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top