[Denver] Catholic school boots student with gay parents [AP]

[buffalo]

I’m all for retaking secular society and re-instituting norms and the like, but the reality is that during this battle for the hearts and minds of the culture, there is bound to be a certain amount of collateral damage. It is our duty as Christians to keep it within acceptable limits, but we should never subscribe to some idealistic fantasy which says that such outcomes can never exist.

I remind you, that there is no organ for the transmission of the Gospel that would not be threatened or corrupted by the presence of this child as long as he or she is being raised by her same-sex parenting duo. Therefore, as long as the Church lacks the authority to tear such a child away from “parents” who are so obviously unacceptable, we ought to resign ourselves to the lesser of two evils and deny this child access to the Gospel so as to safeguard the faith of those in the Christian Communion who can at least exhibit a minimum standard of morality.

This child’s soul is another that must be entrusted to God’s mercy.

 

[Other_Eric]

This child’s soul is another that must be entrusted to God’s mercy.

I accept that. It’s just that in cases like the present one, God’s mercy will need to work in an extraordinary fashion apart from the human transmission of the Gospel.

 

[Paladin_V]

This is a tough situation… and unfortunately will become more and more common.

Allowing the child to attend is a great way to reach a child who may not otherwise be reached. If the parents want the kid raised in the Catholic tradition, great. If they’re willing to accept the fact that the child will be taught that homosexual actions are gravely sinful, great. The child could really benefit from being at this school.

The issue may be the parent’s involvement in school activities, which of course would be unacceptable if they were openly homosexual, particularly at such activities.

If an understanding could be reached between the school and the parents (i.e. your kid can still come, but with the understanding that he will be taught x, y, and z, and you can’t be openly homosexual at any school functions), then why not let him attend?

 

[lutherlic]

This is a tough situation… and unfortunately will become more and more common.

Allowing the child to attend is a great way to reach a child who may not otherwise be reached. If the parents want the kid raised in the Catholic tradition, great. If they’re willing to accept the fact that the child will be taught that homosexual actions are gravely sinful, great. The child could really benefit from being at this school.

The issue may be the parent’s involvement in school activities, which of course would be unacceptable if they were openly homosexual, particularly at such activities.

If an understanding could be reached between the school and the parents (i.e. your kid can still come, but with the understanding that he will be taught x, y, and z, and you can’t be openly homosexual at any school functions), then why not let him attend?

There are more problems than this. As this child gets older he very well may defend his guardians and their lifestyle. That would undermine the instruction of the other children.

The guardians have put this child into an untenable situation in many ways.

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

This is a tough situation… and unfortunately will become more and more common.

Allowing the child to attend is a great way to reach a child who may not otherwise be reached. If the parents want the kid raised in the Catholic tradition, great. If they’re willing to accept the fact that the child will be taught that homosexual actions are gravely sinful, great. The child could really benefit from being at this school.

The issue may be the parent’s involvement in school activities, which of course would be unacceptable if they were openly homosexual, particularly at such activities.

If an understanding could be reached between the school and the parents (i.e. your kid can still come, but with the understanding that he will be taught x, y, and z, and you can’t be openly homosexual at any school functions), then why not let him attend?

In your thread, change ‘homosexual’ to ‘divorced’ and see how big a problem it is. I had kids in Catholic school with me who had divorced parents, who were being raised by their grandparents and one Jewish kid who’s mother was Catholic. In church we sing the hymn “All Are Welcome in This Place” yet we don’t live it in the schools?

If the parents were not waving around their homosexuality like a flag, I say let the kid stay in Catholic school.

 

[buffalo]

In your thread, change ‘homosexual’ to ‘divorced’ and see how big a problem it is. I had kids in Catholic school with me who had divorced parents, who were being raised by their grandparents and one Jewish kid who’s mother was Catholic. In church we sing the hymn “All Are Welcome in This Place” yet we don’t live it in the schools?

If the parents were not waving around their homosexuality like a flag, I say let the kid stay in Catholic school.

All are welcome in this place - welcome to be part of the Body of Christ.

 

[Musician]

As an educator, I would feel it far more profitable for the child’s sake to allow the child to stay in school, and to let the parents know that the child would be taught traditional values.

 

[canadianguy1143]

I must say this, but within the rules of CAF, that anytime a thread that deals with homosexuality we can expect an opinion from ‘OtherEric’. We should note that he himself identifies himself as a lapsed Catholic, so don’t be influenced by his views.

 

[Hypatia]

This is a tough situation… and unfortunately will become more and more common.

Allowing the child to attend is a great way to reach a child who may not otherwise be reached. If the parents want the kid raised in the Catholic tradition, great. If they’re willing to accept the fact that the child will be taught that homosexual actions are gravely sinful, great. The child could really benefit from being at this school.

The issue may be the parent’s involvement in school activities, which of course would be unacceptable if they were openly homosexual, particularly at such activities.

If an understanding could be reached between the school and the parents (i.e. your kid can still come, but with the understanding that he will be taught x, y, and z, and you can’t be openly homosexual at any school functions), then why not let him attend?

It seems if homosexuality is THIS problematic, then the Catholic schools should already have a plan in place. It would the same plan they use for children whose parents or guardians are divorced and remarried, or living together outside of marriage. But I’ve never heard of such a plan among Catholic schools, especially Catholic schools in large cities, like Denver, where a significant portion of the student body is not Catholic. I have a hard time believing that they have applied similar standards to other students in the school. (“I’m sorry Mr.Smith. Little Johnny mentioned that you had a girlfriend sleep over this wkend. Your child needs to find a new school. Thank you for understanding.”)

Moreover, what class is it that preschool kids are taking where the “gravely sinful” nature of homosexuality is even going to be discussed??

 

[Dionysus]

First, why is it that OtherEric has yet to figure out that “Utilitarian Catholicism” is a contradiction in terms?

And also, I think Beau is right here. Turning away a student, not even because he is in disagreement with the church, but because his parents are, would not only accimplish nothing, but would be counterproductive. Not only will the student get the Catholic education his parents actually sought, but both the parents and the child will now likely be revolted by the Catholic church and perhaps Christianity in general because of this bitter experience.

 

[Greg27]

In my view this action is a bit extreme. There is a problem since if Catholic schools start expelling pupils for the failings of their parents, one has to ask where it will end. Will the church start expelling students whose parents are divorced, not living in a regularised marriage (i.e. one that did not comply strictly to the formalities of canon law), single parents, or in situations the church dissaproves? How does the church make such decisions, and on what information and basis? Do the parties effected have access to natural justice by knowing the case against them and getting a chance to respond? What sort of image will the church send to the wider community if it starts expelling children because their parents don’t live up to high moral standards? What if the parents divorce, separate or remarry while the child is midway through the school year or close to exams? Should the child be expelled then, disrupting their schooling?

Unless the parents actively disrupt the school and its activities, I think the children should be allowed to stay so long as they satisfy the normal criteria colleges use in selecting and admitting pupils, and should not be expelled after they are enrolled unless they themselves are extremely disruptive and break school rules and there is no other way to deal with the issue, as is the usual practice in most private and public schools.

 

[rep140]

I’m not surprised because this is Archbishop Chaput territory. We have non Catholics in our parochial school. These kids are living in homes where their parents are heretics. I’m sure that this diocese has the same.

 

[richard_wang]

First off, as usual, the media is trying to sway public opinion by misstating the situation.

The child’s parents aren’t lesbians. She has a mother who has same-sex attraction but the other woman is not her other “mother/parent” and has no parental rights The State of Colorado does not recognize “homosexual marriage”.

Why did the mother send her child to a Catholic school, since this certainly wasn’t the only school available?

Why did she send her daughter to a school that is run by an organization that is so “intolerant” of her lifestyle?

Could she have sent her child there as a method of advocacy?

Where there any complaints by other parents or students?

One must understand that Catholic schools in the United States were founded to combat secularism and anti-Catholicism. And it is a sad comment of this system that in the minds of many it no longer is an institution which stands for and teaches Catholic values, but merely as a good place to send your kids.

By the way I remember a time when if you weren’t a parishioner in good standing you had very little chance of attending a parochial school and the parents would be interviewed by the priest and the sister in charge of the school. And even more shocking, I remember a time when being divorced precluded you from sending your child to parochial school since it was seen as committing the sin of scandal.

 

[buffalo]

In my view this action is a bit extreme. There is a problem since if Catholic schools start expelling pupils for the failings of their parents, one has to ask where it will end. Will the church start expelling students whose parents are divorced, not living in a regularised marriage (i.e. one that did not comply strictly to the formalities of canon law), single parents, or in situations the church dissaproves? How does the church make such decisions, and on what information and basis? Do the parties effected have access to natural justice by knowing the case against them and getting a chance to respond? What sort of image will the church send to the wider community if it starts expelling children because their parents don’t live up to high moral standards? What if the parents divorce, separate or remarry while the child is midway through the school year or close to exams? Should the child be expelled then, disrupting their schooling?

Unless the parents actively disrupt the school and its activities, I think the children should be allowed to stay so long as they satisfy the normal criteria colleges use in selecting and admitting pupils, and should not be expelled after they are enrolled unless they themselves are extremely disruptive and break school rules and there is no other way to deal with the issue, as is the usual practice in most private and public schools.

It is a matter of degree - homosexual acts are intrinsically evil.

 

[Zoe_Brain]

It is a matter of degree - homosexual acts are intrinsically evil.

And referring to a pre-schooler as “collateral damage” is… what exactly?

I can guarantee that this child will treat the Church’s teachings with considerable scepticism after this. By their fruits shall ye know them.

 

[Ahimsa]

By the way I remember a time when if you weren’t a parishioner in good standing you had very little chance of attending a parochial school and the parents would be interviewed by the priest and the sister in charge of the school. And even more shocking, I remember a time when being divorced precluded you from sending your child to parochial school since it was seen as committing the sin of scandal.

That’s too shocking to contemplate.

 

[Cobbfmly]

Should we line parents up and ask them if:

1. Have you ever had an affair?
2. Is your marriage valid?
3. Do you believe in the real presence?
4. Do you use contraception?
5. Do you support in any way the choice of abortion?

If you answer yes to any of these questions, please remove your children from school.

And how many schools would close tomorrow?

#1 should be changed to: Are you currently in an affair or have had an affair that you have not confessed to?

 

[Elizabeth502]

Dale, thanks for pointing out the other conversation, to which I also contributed and will paste below my comments (and add some others) in response to #24 on this thread, with which I agree, and to #31, with which I disagree:

-Catholic schools hold that the parents/family of the student is for all practical purposes an extension of the school; they expect parents to be involved (and take responsibility) more intensely, regularly, than is expected (or could be ever be enforced) in publics. The corollary of the that is that the school expects to support the family. There is a kind of two-way accountability. Thus, the school would naturally see the lesbian situation as contrary, problematic to that mutuality.

-Parents or guardians enrolling children must agree to the moral teachings which will be presented, as a condition of enrollment. Those moral teachings include Catholic teachings on sexuality, which is directly opposed to the lifestyle being lived by the lesbians. Now, technically, Catholic heterosexual parents associated with that school could be teaching principles which are also contradictory to what their children are being taught at that school, but with a lesbian couple, the school would know for a fact that there is a lifestyle being “taught” (modeled) which is directly opposed to the school’s curriculum content.

-Catholic institutions (not just schools) are conscious of the possibility of scandal to students and to other parents, and to a contradictory message sent as a religious institution imparting specific precepts. In that sense also, the enrollment in the first place could be considered a cause for scandal. That is on a different plane than the possible situation of divorced/remarried parents in the school, because that contradiction with Catholic teaching may not even be known beyond the couple, and probably wouldn’t be known to all the school.

Catholic institutions other than schools do employ openly gay people (such as in diocesan offices) and do support domestic partner benefits, such as bereavement leave, etc. But those are not institutions witnessing to the cohesion of family life as an institution, which Catholic schools are.

I would not try to seek acceptance for myself or my lifestyle if I were gay, within the confines of a Catholic institution – and certainly not in a school setting. It is problematic on its face. If I wanted acceptance on equal terms, in every way, I would join a different church, or I would renounce any active practice of that lifestyle, should I want to remain a member in good standing in the Church, without controversy. (Thus, it would require one to live as celibate, not to cohabit with a partner of romantic interest, and certainly not to create a formal partnership such as “parenthood”/guardianship of children.) Everything is problematic, in that even the terminology conflicts with Catholic principles. It puts both the couple and the Church in an impossible position given that the institution does not accept dual “motherhood” of one child, while two lesbian guardians of one child maintain that both wish to be called “mother.”

I have taught in Catholic and public schools, attended both kinds, and sent my children to Catholic schools. There is no comparison between the significance and visibility of family units in the Catholic setting vs. the public setting (and the private secular setting). Of course that works in a positive way, also, in a Catholic school, should there be a crisis in the family – even a minor one. Generally the whole community (church and school) is urged to, and does, pull together to assist the family during a time of traumatic news, tragic event, extended illness, physical disaster, financial crisis, etc. So merely the fact that the Church does not recognize two lesbians as being family to the child – whatever the civil authorities recognize or society informally at large recognizes – is an insoluble problem in light of Catholic education’s stated mission and practical operation.

Bottom line: the diocese did the right thing; the lesbian couple did the wrong thing.

 

[Other_Eric]

As an educator, I would feel it far more profitable for the child’s sake to allow the child to stay in school, and to let the parents know that the child would be taught traditional values.

Students at any school receive lessons from more than just the teachers. They also receive lessons from their peers. Therefore, the seamless message of traditional values becomes compromised when one of those children becomes an apologist for rank depravity and is assisted in this mission by his or her “parents.” The orthodox parents, who are paying private school tuition fees, do not deserve to have the value of their children’s education dimmed in the slightest.

 

[Stylites]

It is ludicrous to see the opinions of non- and lapsed-Catholics on the lawful policies of a private Catholic-run insitution, whatever the opinions are.

.