Dealing with non-Catholics in Catholic Schools

[jmcrae]

You are in Canada. The laws may well be as you state them there. However, most of us are in the USA, and those requirements that you insist all Catholic schools must adhere to simply do not apply here.

…and here I thought that it was the USA that was supposed to be the arrogant assumer that everybody worked the way we do…

No church pays taxes to the US Government.

People pay taxes in Canada, and some of them (ie; Catholics) are considered religious minorities, so their tax money goes to support their culture (because we are not a melting pot; we are a cultural mosaic) which means that Catholic people (not churches) who pay taxes have their tax money go to support their Catholic schools.

 

[Lutheranteach]

Let me make it clear. I teach four classes a day. 6th grade English, 7th grade English, 8th grade English and one class of 8th grade religion. I am there because the “good Catholic” woman was giving the kids of friends grades they did not earn; had very low test scores for three years; and had several run-ins with non-Catholic students and parents. On top of this the local Catholic high schools had sent a number of letters of complaint saying the kids they accepted from the school were very unprepared for high school English.

This was the first day for me, and it went very well, but it’s going to be a very tough year for a lot of kids because they need to get up to speed and they just got introduced to something they hadn’t had yet this year, homework.

I’m a little shocked by how many of you are reading what you want to read and not always exactly what I wrote, or what I thought was clear. If you want to call a protestant a heretic or tell him his beliefs are in error, go ahead. Just don’t be shocked if the conversation ends or the exchange gets heated.

In addition, anyone who has ever met me in person would tell you that I am a looooong way from being PC. I may be diplomatic, but not PC. There is a difference.

I never wanted this job. I was very happy to be at home doing research and editing an new textbook on Modern American Lit. Now, I am doing that and teaching middle school English

In the Cleveland area, 29 Catholic Churches will close this year. 41 will be merged. In 16 months, there will be 52 fewer parishes. 42% of the Diocese’s parishes are losing money this year. A lot of Parish schools are going to vanish this year. Who stays and who goes is going to be based on attendance and test scores.

 

[ALLGIRLS]

Well…lets just say at the Private and Episcopal schools we all paid the same tuition. At the Catholic School, my two children’s tuition was equal to that of four Catholic childrens. More money for the school when non-Catholic kids entered the school with keeping class size down but still bringing in more money. All schools want their checks. At the Catholic School having non-Catholics were a bonus–I hope that makes sense.

God Bless!

In my understanding, this is because nonCatholics do not financially support the parish church or diocese, which normally subsidizes the school to some degree. (that’s what happens at our school. But we have NO nonCatholics. We have a waiting list for active parishioners’ kids, no way we’d be taking nonCatholics over them!).

In Christ,

Ellen

 

[ALLGIRLS]

This was one of the abuses that was occurring quite frequently, and it actually has taken a very long time to correct it. Up until a couple of years ago, we still had teachers at one of our parish schools who thought it was their role to do Sacramental Preparation for First Holy Communion, and they were always trying to schedule First Holy Communion Masses in their school gym.

Up until relatively recently, we kept having to explain it to them, over and over and over and over again, that they can’t be doing that - the kids are to receive their preparation and their Sacrament at the Church, not at the school, because it is a Sacrament of Initiation into the Church; not into the school.

I’m confused (not an uncommon occurance ). My kid(s) go/will go to our parish school (the oldest is in 1st grade. The others are a toddler and preschoolers). Sacremental preparation takes place at school, during religion class, at the appropriate year (2nd grade for 1st Confession and Communion, 8th grade for Confirmation) (parents, of course, are involved as well), and the kids receive 1st Communion and Reconciliation at a Mass and Service with their classmates (in the church)(Confirmation is done at the Cathedral). The PSR (CCD) kids also receive instruction by their teachers, and also receive at special Masses/Services with their classmates. How is it done at your parish? Do the school kids have to attend another class for preparation in addition to the religion class they attend everyday while at school? That would irk me, personally. What’s the point of Catholic school then? I’m in a very good public school district, I could just send my kids to PSR and save a few bucks!

In Christ,

Ellen

 

[jmcrae]

How is it done at your parish?

We go to each of the parish schools and give a talk, inviting the kids to ask their parents if they can come and do Sacramental Preparation for whichever Sacrament it is that we are doing.

Then, the kids sign up to come to between 4-6 short sessions on a Sunday (about 20 minutes or so). The parents come to a short meeting to begin the process, and then the kids come to the Sunday meetings. For Confirmation, they also have a meeting during the week, as well, to come to, because there is a bit more for them to do - Saint projects, learning about the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, and getting into the whole thing with what Chrism is, etc.

At the Catholic school, they do the academic aspect of the Sacrament - the history behind it, how it was instituted, and that sort of thing, whereas at the parish, we look at how they are going to be receiving it, what prayers they need to know, and that sort of thing. They also have an opportunity to discuss their own ideas about it, and ask questions.

Do the school kids have to attend another class for preparation in addition to the religion class they attend everyday while at school?

Only for a very short time - it’s not like a year-long thing, or anything like that. They still learn their history of Christianity in the regular school religion classes - we don’t deal with any of that in Sacramental Preparation, or at least, not in any great depth.

 

[ALLGIRLS]

…and that’s fine, but it is still true that non-Catholics pay more tuition than Catholics do, and as far as I’m aware, Catholic students don’t have to prove that their parents are contributing to the school in addition to paying tuition. If they did, that would BE 'tuition."

So if the schools accept non-Catholics, and charge them more (for whatever reason) then they need to treat those students with courtesy. NOT priviledge. NOT deferring to a different religious faith or idea, but at least refraining from direct, deliberate insult.

You know, like teaching Catholicism straight out, without worrying about what other people believe…and if a student questions something, say “well, I understand that other beliefs might be different, but this is what we believe, and this is what we teach. You might want to ask your parents about this,” rather than “NO, you heretic, you are wrong and your’re going to hell!”

I mean, that’s not too much to ask, is it?

Um, no offense, but what planet are you living on?? We have to “prove” DAILY that we’re “contributing” beyond just paying tuition! We have to prove it just to get the kids in the school! (we do have a waiting list, as I previously mentioned), and we have to continue to “jump through hoops” (I really don’t mean that as disrespectfully as it sounds. I totally agree that we should, actually) to keep our kids there. NonCatholics are not required, nor expected, to support the parish (parish, not school), with their “time, talent, and treasure”. It’s expected that they are doing that at their own (nonCatholic) church.

In Christ,

Ellen

 

[dianaiad]

Um, no offense, but what planet are you living on?? We have to “prove” DAILY that we’re “contributing” beyond just paying tuition!

I have already been corrected on this matter, and accepted that correction.

We have to prove it just to get the kids in the school! (we do have a waiting list, as I previously mentioned), and we have to continue to “jump through hoops” (I really don’t mean that as disrespectfully as it sounds. I totally agree that we should, actually) to keep our kids there. NonCatholics are not required, nor expected, to support the parish (parish, not school), with their “time, talent, and treasure”. It’s expected that they are doing that at their own (nonCatholic) church.

In Christ,

Ellen

 

[ALLGIRLS]

We go to each of the parish schools and give a talk, inviting the kids to ask their parents if they can come and do Sacramental Preparation for whichever Sacrament it is that we are doing.

Then, the kids sign up to come to between 4-6 short sessions on a Sunday (about 20 minutes or so). The parents come to a short meeting to begin the process, and then the kids come to the Sunday meetings. For Confirmation, they also have a meeting during the week, as well, to come to, because there is a bit more for them to do - Saint projects, learning about the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, and getting into the whole thing with what Chrism is, etc.

At the Catholic school, they do the academic aspect of the Sacrament - the history behind it, how it was instituted, and that sort of thing, whereas at the parish, we look at how they are going to be receiving it, what prayers they need to know, and that sort of thing. They also have an opportunity to discuss their own ideas about it, and ask questions.

Only for a very short time - it’s not like a year-long thing, or anything like that. They still learn their history of Christianity in the regular school religion classes - we don’t deal with any of that in Sacramental Preparation, or at least, not in any great depth.

That’s seems so weird to me, like overkill. Wonder if it’s a Canadian vs. USA thing. At my school when I was a kid, and now at my kids’ school, it’s all taken care of in religion class (or PSR/CCD, for the public school kids). There’s a couple extra meetings for the parents and projects for the kids in sacramental years (including service hours for Confirmation), but there’s no extra classes to attend. The prayers are learned at school, and for 1st Communion there’s a “practice” (rehearsal?) a couple days before the Mass. That’s it. Interesting how things are done differently in different areas!

In Christ

Ellen

Ellen

 

[dianaiad]

The OP mentions that “Lutheranteach” has been hired on as a Religion teacher at a Catholic school, which is where the discussion on non-Catholics teaching in Catholic schools originates from.

Tell me, what would your reaction be, if Lutheranteach were to be hired on to teach Theology at your Mormon junior seminary?

Well, Lutherans, I understand, are a whole lot closer to Catholicism than they are to Mormonism. At least Catholics think that Lutherans are Christians.

Never mind that…the thing is, we don’t HAVE a “Mormon junior seminary.” We have “Seminary,” which is strictly religious training for an hour a day; in Utah it is done during the school day as one of the classes high school kids can take. (don’t get your knickers in a twist…the classes are NOT on the school grounds, and nobody but Mormons need take it; everybody else gets an extra elective. Many Mormons also choose to take the elective rather than religion classes, and either skip those classes or go to before/after school sessions instead. The students) Mormon high school students elsewhere do the 6AM classes if they go to seminary at all (most do.) Such classes are taught by Mormons who are also credentialed high school teachers. I rather doubt that non-Mormons would want the position, since in most areas it is an unpaid calling, not a job.

All that said, no–we wouldn’t want a non-Mormon teaching Mormon religion classes. But then, I don’t think non-Catholics should teach Catholic religion classes, either, if there is any other choice.

Then I don’t think you disagree with the rest of us.

No one has ever suggested doing such a thing.

 

[StillWondering]

This makes me really, really sad. I think what may happen is that Catholic families will be driven away even more. I know I wouldn’t want to pay for my child to have a “Catholic” education that wasn’t really Catholic and in fact, intentionally designed to downplay Catholicism.

I would not feel comfortable sending my children to a school that took your suggestions to be inclusive. It would teach them a false understanding that I do not see my faith as the one true Church founded by Christ 2000 years ago. It’s much more dangerous for a Catholic child to hear wishy washy teachings from a priest than a non-Catholic. The first will make him doubt his reasoning and faith while the second, he can not listen to if he has a firm understanding of his faith.

 

[emeraldcoast]

I’m confused (not an uncommon occurance ). My kid(s) go/will go to our parish school (the oldest is in 1st grade. The others are a toddler and preschoolers). Sacremental preparation takes place at school, during religion class, at the appropriate year (2nd grade for 1st Confession and Communion, 8th grade for Confirmation) (parents, of course, are involved as well), and the kids receive 1st Communion and Reconciliation at a Mass and Service with their classmates (in the church)(Confirmation is done at the Cathedral). The PSR (CCD) kids also receive instruction by their teachers, and also receive at special Masses/Services with their classmates. How is it done at your parish? Do the school kids have to attend another class for preparation in addition to the religion class they attend everyday while at school? That would irk me, personally. What’s the point of Catholic school then? I’m in a very good public school district, I could just send my kids to PSR and save a few bucks!

In Christ,

Ellen

Ellen,
What you stated happens at your children’s school is what I would expect to happen, but that is not the case at the school our children attended. It would irk me if my children had to attend another class besides the religion class that they received in school. This just doesn’t make any sense to me.

God Bless!

 

[crazzeto]

How can it not, if you believe it? What, you actually have to intimidate and insult other people’s beliefs in order to show how rational yours are?

This is NOT included in any definition of rationality I know about. If your beliefs are rational, they are rational. That will show.

Who said anything about intimidating? What I’m talking about is not avoiding logical conclusions. I’m sorry, but Catholic school is something you have to pay money to attend, you have to want your kids to be there. It’s not your corner public school that the state forces you to send your kids to. If you don’t want your kids getting a Catholic education, don’t send them to Catholic school.

I find it interesting though, that you automactically equate “truth” with intimidation, they are not logically connected. It is possible to come to logical truthful conclusions with out beating someone who follows a different faith over the head with a bat.

Regarding your first comment “How can it not, if you beleive it”. This would be an example of irrational, wishing upon a star, or at best relitivistic faith. That just doesn’t cut it, that isn’t the faith I want my kids to have. I want them to be well grounded in the realities of the church, it’s full history good bad and otherwise. This is what builds true faith. But you know, if my Catholic schools start pretending they’re public schools and start pandering to minorities, where do I send my kids for a good, well grounded faith oriented education? Sorry, I’m not going to settle for “home schooling” as the only viable option because some family from the LDS church want’s to send their kids to my Parish’s Catholic school but not have their kids exposed to the truth of Gods revelation.

This is a complete non-sequitur. How in the name of all that is wonderful is teaching what you believe to be truth IRRATIONAL?

Beleive it or not, there is such a thing as an irrational faith. For instance, Anglicans claimign they’re they universal christian church set up by Jesus Christ… Universal to England that is. That’s irrational, a complete denial of factual history. I could go on.

That can only be true if your faith IS irrational. Since you don’t think so, how does rationality or irrationality enter into the discussion at all?

,snip to end…

No, that my faith is the only one that is true is completely rational. The idea that just every faith under the sun is true in completly and utterly irrational. God is not schizophrenic.

 

[StrawberryJam]

I would not feel comfortable sending my children to a school that took your suggestions to be inclusive. It would teach them a false understanding that I do not see my faith as the one true Church founded by Christ 2000 years ago. It’s much more dangerous for a Catholic child to hear wishy washy teachings from a priest than a non-Catholic. The first will make him doubt his reasoning and faith while the second, he can not listen to if he has a firm understanding of his faith.

At what age and or grade do you think most children can or should know that a person who teaches them everday does not agree with their faith, and understand it in the way you are expecting them to?

 

[StrawberryJam]

Where in the world did I comment about a teacher being a parent? Y’know, if you use the ‘quote’ function on your replies, it would make things easier. I had to go back and look at every post I wrote on this thread, and didn’t see anything even remotely like 'a teacher is a parent."

I DID write this: " I don’t disagree with you, actually. I do believe that Catholic schools SHOULD hire Catholic teachers first. However, once you get to the choice between, say…a qualified math teacher (not Catholic) and an unqualified Catholic, as a parent, which would you prefer the school to hire? "

That is asking who you, as the parent of a student, would prefer that a Catholic school hire. Please note that the “you” in the last clause refers back to “as a parent.” Which means that I was addressing the READER as a parent, not calling the TEACHER a 'parent."

Both your point and your insult are based upon a misunderstanding of what I wrote.

As to “Mormon” schools…the CoJCoLDS doesn’t have private elementary/high schools in the USA. We have ‘seminary,’ which is additional religious training along with public schools. “Seminaries” require credentialed teachers, even though that is a specific religion class. We have schools elsewhere in the world, where public education is not available. As to our collegesand universities… well…most are tier one schools; pretty good for institutions that have been around less than half the time Yale has.

Most Mormons, if they don’t like the public schools around them, choose to home school.

And frankly, I don’t get the hostility. I’m on the CATHOLIC side in this issue, mostly.

If Jospeh Smith was the best thing to ever happen for the world, then why did catholics have more schools in the very country he was born in, for such a long time? Let alone looking world wide on this matter.

I guess, you feel the need to pick my post apart and call it hostile because it is a very obvious point mormons can not ignore.

You are not on the Catholic side of this issue, “mostly” or otherwise. Re-read your pointed statements about “if they are teaching the truth”

Which means your entire statement was void, as you do not believe catholics teach truth to begin with. Throwaway statement.

 

[zaffiroborant]

In all honesty, Z, I don’t understand why the words “heretic” or ‘in error’ should ever come up in religious instruction. I really don’t. The only way they COULD come up is if the class got off topic; that is, when the teacher stops teaching Catholicism and starts teaching something else–and that’s a waste of time.

After all, if you are busy teaching what you believe is the truth, where do you have time to talk about something that isn’t? In fact, the only time the word should come up is if one of the students ask…and the answer should be something like “well, that isn’t what we believe, and it’s not what we teach. If you have questions, please ask your parents or your own church leaders. HERE, we teach this…” and go straight on with what you should be teaching.

A Catholic school does not just teach Catholic doctrine, it teaches Catholicism. We believe Catholicism encompasses the belief(faith and morals), practice (how to live the faith) and history (when and why the belief was articulated and how others have lived the faith) of our church. An example of why the words error of heresy might come up, our councils are part of our history and we see them as integral to teaching Catholicism. These councils addressed heresy and error, since they are part of our history and thus a part of teaching of Catholicism, those words will come up. This will probably drag up the word anathema (which along with the word plethora can not be formed by my mouth??).

I think it was you who mentioned this having to do this, but maybe if more was taught on error and heresy you wouldn’t have had to correct Catholics on the difference between Trinitarianism and Modalism

 

[dianaiad]

No, that my faith is the only one that is true is completely rational. The idea that just every faith under the sun is true in completly and utterly irrational. God is not schizophrenic.

Do you have any idea how irrational a statement this is–to the Mormon reading it?

 

[StrawberryJam]

Do you have any idea how irrational a statement this is–to the Mormon reading it?

It sounds like a Mormon could have written it, if it were written by a Mormon.

You guys are the same in this regard. It’s rather simple to figure out who has more basis to the claim than the other. Just knowing what we do about these and other matters.

Can you name any hospitals Mormons started before the USA was founded?

 

[dianaiad]

If Jospeh Smith was the best thing to ever happen for the world, then why did catholics have more schools in the very country he was born in, for such a long time? Let alone looking world wide on this matter.

Well, I think that has something to do with the fact that there have always been a few more Catholics than there have been Mormons: something like 71 to 1 or some such number. However, if you ARE going to look at schools, figure that we had a university going before we were 45 years in this nation. Catholics didn’t found the first Catholic university anywhere in the world until 1425, I think…took you a thousand years to found a university? Really?

Only took us 45…though that’s just the official founding date of BYU. in actuality, the school began 25 years before that, since the Mormons under BY began the “University of Deseret,” which split into “The University of Utah” and “Brigham Young University” later.

I guess, you feel the need to pick my post apart and call it hostile because it is a very obvious point mormons can not ignore.

I “picked [your] post apart” because it was based upon an error. I showed you where the error was. I called it ‘hostile,’ because it was.

You are not on the Catholic side of this issue, “mostly” or otherwise. Re-read your pointed statements about “if they are teaching the truth”

Which means your entire statement was void, as you do not believe catholics teach truth to begin with. Throwaway statement.

Of course I don’t believe that Catholics are teaching the truth. At least, not all of it. I’m a Mormon. If I thought you were teaching the truth, I’d be a Catholic.

What’s that got to do with the idea that Catholics should be the ones teaching Catholicism? They should be. Nobody else could teach it properly. The fact that I don’t believe Catholicism is the ‘true church’ doesn’t negate the idea that YOU do. Nor does it negate the idea that if you believe you are teaching the truth, then behave as if you ARE teaching the truth.

That means–teach what you believe to be true. You don’t need to address that which is false, after all–unless you want to address every variation of religion there is every time you open your mouth to make a religious point.

I read a post on this thread that stated that one of the reasons that Catholic schools allow non-Catholics in is for evangilistic purposes. I can’t tell you just how…wrong…that struck me. Non-Catholic parents send their kids to Catholic schools because they think that the EDUCATION they will get there will be superior academically. They have to pay extra for the priviledge of having their parental freedom of religion undermined this way?

Y’know, I am a huge fan of homeschooling. One of the reasons I got into teaching is, ironically enough, because I think homeschooling is a wonderful alternative to public and private religious schools, I wanted to be someone who could provide parents the academic knowledge they need to teach their kids. You have just confirmed my thinking.

While I am absolutely on the side of Catholics teaching Catholicism in Catholic schools, I would be extremely wary of sending my kid to a school that not only charges me twice what Catholic students are charged, but whose purpose was to convert them away from the faith I have taught them, without telling me upfront that they intend to do just that.

 

[dianaiad]

It sounds like a Mormon could have written it, if it were written by a Mormon.

How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood? M’goodness, that was a circular statement, and once you cease to be dizzy, you’ll wish you hadn’t written it. Think about it a moment.

You guys are the same in this regard. It’s rather simple to figure out who has more basis to the claim than the other. Just knowing what we do about these and other matters.

uhm…you don’t want to go there. You really don’t.

Can you name any hospitals Mormons started before the USA was founded?

Be a little difficult to do that, m’friend, since the USA was 'founded" in 1776, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was not begun for another 54 years.

Now…what’s your excuse?

 

[zaffiroborant]

I read a post on this thread that stated that one of the reasons that Catholic schools allow non-Catholics in is for evangilistic purposes. I can’t tell you just how…wrong…that struck me. Non-Catholic parents send their kids to Catholic schools because they think that the EDUCATION they will get there will be superior academically. They have to pay extra for the priviledge of having their parental freedom of religion undermined this way?

Oh don’t worry about it too much the evangelizing is countered by calling them heretics Sorry but it was the first thought that came to mind and it made me laugh.

I read a post on this thread that stated that one of the reasons that Catholic schools allow non-Catholics in is for evangilistic purposes. I can’t tell you just how…wrong…that struck me. Non-Catholic parents send their kids to Catholic schools because they think that the EDUCATION they will get there will be superior academically. They have to pay extra for the priviledge of having their parental freedom of religion undermined this way?

While I am absolutely on the side of Catholics teaching Catholicism in Catholic schools, I would be extremely wary of sending my kid to a school that not only charges me twice what Catholic students are charged, but whose purpose was to convert them away from the faith I have taught them, without telling me upfront that they intend to do just that.

Well Catholics view the teaching of Catholic the faith as evangelizing, anytime you teach your own beliefs you are evangelizing aren’t you? Parents have to be aware that their children are being taught Catholic belief though they may not understand we view it as evangelizing. Now it may be annoying that Catholics think that just by teaching someone our faith they will come to believe and the OP was a bit annoyed by this thinking.

Do not assume protestants of any denomination would certainly be Catholic if they just knew

But I imagine that there are plenty of LDS missionaries who believe that if someone would just learn the LDS faith they would join.

As to finding that Catholics view this as an opportunity for evangelization. Since we view teaching our faith as evangelizing (and I think most faiths see it that way), it seems rather disingenuous to view the evangelizing (teaching of Catholic faith) as wrong or undermining of parental instruction or some thing kept secret. The non-Catholic parents are fully aware that Catholicism will be taught to their kids. These parents agreed to have their kids evangelized/taught when they enrolled them, they felt the education they would receive would outweigh the teaching/evangelization or “undermining” they would receive. Me I would have a lot of reservations about sending my kids to say a Baptist or Lutheran school. I am so grateful to have good schools in my area making this a hypothetical question for me, I don’t have to make the choice of sending my kids to a poor school or to a school that will teach my kids that they have the truth and my faith is has it wrong.

And by the way I view requiring non-LDS students at Byu to take courses on the BOM and D&C as evangelizing and a proper mission of the university, but I see requiring non-LDS to practice the LDS faith (WOW, ecclesiastical endorsement and such) as way over the top. But hey these students are aware and agree to them, just the same as parents of students at Catholic schools. What is the difference in tuition for LDS vs non-LDS at BYU?