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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Beau_Ouiville
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yesterday in another thread on CAF Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver addressed this issue; in that article a couple of facts that I had not been aware of came out. First, there are two children involved, one in kindergarten and another in pre-school.

Secondly, the couple was using this as part of an agenda promoting same sex marriage. Here is a quote from the Archbishop:

“It is not about punishing the child for the sins of his or her parents,” he said. “It is simply that the lesbian couple is saying that their relationship is a good one that should be accepted by everyone; and the Church cannot agree to that.”

I believe that Archbishop Chaput and the pastor are handling this very well.
 
AnotherVoice said:
Yesterday in another thread on CAF Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver addressed this issue; in that article a couple of facts that I had not been aware of came out. First, there are two children involved, one in kindergarten and another in pre-school.

Secondly, the couple was using this as part of an agenda promoting same sex marriage. Here is a quote from the Archbishop:

“It is not about punishing the child for the sins of his or her parents,” he said. “It is simply that the lesbian couple is saying that their relationship is a good one that should be accepted by everyone; and the Church cannot agree to that.”

I believe that Archbishop Chaput and the pastor are handling this very well.
Click to expand...
Thank you…If people would understand it is the job of the church to get us to heaven if they can…not to push someones social agendas

WE need to pray for those children…that their so called parents do not use them for their own political purposes…I feel so sorry for them
 
kmdeacon07 said:
Elizabeth502

I believe that your legalistic argument fails the most important test: would the inclusive, loving Jesus have made this same decision about this child. The evidence from the gospels is clear to me. I don’t think he would resort to fine line arguments about family structure non communion vs. failure to attend mass non communion, but would rather search the hearts of the people involved and testing them, and all of us, with the only judgement he ever proclaimed…whatsoever you do, to the least of my people…

I don’t believe the Good Shepherd would claim protection for one group of sheep as a reason to abandon others.
Click to expand...
Mine is anything but a legalistic argument. Please stop with the holier-than-thou judgmentalism. You not only did not get the point of the earlier posts (mine and others), you once again entirely missed the point of my most recent post. I am the messenger, not the creator of the Catholic school system and policies. Do not confuse me with some self-righteous judgment on your part about who does and does not follow the gospel.

Catholic schooling, just like other schooling, needs first of all a framework. If you don’t understand the importance of the ***family unit ***in the dynamic of Catholic schools (and clearly you don’t), then there’s no point in trying to have an intelligent discussion with you. You’re arguing emotion. I’m not less gospel than you. The Catholic school policies are not less gospel than you. Nor are you in a superior position to “search the hearts” of the lesbian couple or anyone else appying to a Catholic school. Nor is anyone being “abandoned.” No one, on the grounds of being Catholic (as I just explained, but that explanation flew right over your head), has a fundamental right to attend a Catholic school.

Therefore, I’m going to insert a post on this subject from the Social Justice forum:
Corki said:
It is not the Catholic school’s role to teach any child Catholic values. That is the duty and responsibility of the parents. The school’s role is to give structure to those values, to model them in a learning environment and to reiinforce and deepen what is learned at home. ***If the child is not learning Catholic values at home, there is nothing to reinforce. ***

As someone else mentioned in this thread (or the other one on the same topic) it is routine to refuse or delay Baptism when there is little hope the child will be raised with the Catholic failth. It is unfair to do otherwise. The same thing goes for Catholic education. It is unfair to give a child the example of good Catholic moral living and then send him/her home to a complete contradiction.

The Bishop also pointed out in his letter that the parents have to be able to partner with the school in the education process. This would be extremely difficult if the parent was basically throwing Church teaching into the face of the school.
Click to expand...
 
redrosetea said:
People always get umpty when the Church dares to act like what Christ intended it to be…Christ certainly didn’t put up with anything He felt was sinful

He not only drove the money changers from the temple…he whipped them, and overturned their tables…He withered a fig tree for not baring fruit out of season…He called the rich young man a fool and said tonight his life might be required

He gave us the sermon on the mount and said no man can serve 2 masters…to enter by the narrow path for the road to destruction is wide and to keep his commandments

I don’t care if people are bent out of shape…they can send their kids elsewhere

Christ made it clear we are to love God and keep His commands…you don’t love your neighbor by allowing them to spit in God’s face and telling them it doesn’t even matter please themsleves
Click to expand...
And he rebuked the apostles for sending away little children. He welcomed and blessed little children (with no strings attached).
 
kelvinf said:
And he rebuked the apostles for sending away little children. He welcomed and blessed little children (with no strings attached).
Click to expand...
Please read what the Archbishop has said, it does make sense to me. And I had been at the same place you appear to be. It really was the guardians who were attaching the strings.
 
AnotherVoice said:
Please read what the Archbishop has said, it does make sense to me. And I had been at the same place you appear to be. It really was the guardians who were attaching the strings.
Click to expand...
Secondly, the couple was using this as part of an agenda promoting same sex marriage. Here is a quote from the Archbishop:
Click to expand...
“It is not about punishing the child for the sins of his or her parents,” he said. “It is simply that the lesbian couple is saying that their relationship is a good one that should be accepted by everyone; and the Church cannot agree to that.”
Click to expand...
Do you mean the couple is using the child OR the decision as part of an agenda to promote same sex marriage?
 
Without reading (sorry on my cell again, and my eyes get really tired) all the posts, one thing I know is true. This is a quagmire.

From a faith perspective, I can’t imagine being the teacher who is stuck with the job of talking about the sin living in an unmarried state, regardless of orientation, and the Church tenet against homosexual unions, to a bunch of 7th and 8th graders, knowing one of the kids has a couple of moms at home. At best, it would be hurtful to the kid, who might have to endure the discussion repeatedly, but the alternative of avoiding Church teaching is unacceptable.

Sooner or later there will be an allegation of bullying or discrimination, warranted or not. If not by this couple, then the next couple who will use the first couple (if allowed in the school) as a basis for discrimination if the school says no to their kid.

If the school agrees to violating the faith by allowing the “couple”, they’re setting themselves up for later grief. If kid gets a “D” when they think he or she should have an “A” or face loss of entrance into a prestigious high school, then the couple will be able to scream discrimination or harassment. If the school hasn’t kept copious records, there may be a nuisance settlement. That in turn will set the stage for further actions. Anyone who has acted on a Catholic Board or taught at a Catholic school can attest to the number of specious complaints filed all because a principal hasn’t followed Church tenets, and gotten knifed for their trouble.

This getting way too long for a cell phone…my eyes are crossing.
 
kelvinf said:
And he rebuked the apostles for sending away little children. He welcomed and blessed little children (with no strings attached).
Click to expand...
So adopt the kids out to an intact Catholic family…no strings attached…that way the children would be brought up in the faith by those living the faith…good idea, maybe someone should suggest it.
 
NewEnglandPries said:
Well since the Dallas Charter it is indeed a one strike policy. Anyone involved with sexual activity with a minor (male or female) is immediately reported to the local authorities. And if the case is deemed credible is then suspended and the case refered to Rome for removal from the clerical state.
Click to expand...
What do you think about the quotation below? It’s a post from another forum
before 1969, ex-communication is the punishment for such scandal but today, it is traditional Catholics who still keep to the believes and practices of the Catholic church of Post Vatican II that are ex- communicated.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church is today filled with liberal mental Priests and lay members and my opinion is that this scandal will never end until the catholic church returns to its disciplinary practices on priest
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church openly condemns homosexuality amongst the secular community but seems to be relatively quiet when it happens amongst religious. We only get to hear apologies.

We seem to be looking at the speck in our brother’s eye without paying attention to the log in our eyes:shrug:
 
kelvinf said:
**What do you think about the quotation below? **It’s a post from another forum

The Catholic Church openly condemns homosexuality amongst the secular community but seems to be relatively quiet when it happens amongst religious. We only get to hear apologies.

We seem to be looking at the speck in our brother’s eye without paying attention to the log in our eyes:shrug:
Click to expand...
I think it’s the stuff that other threads are made of. It is not the subject of this thread. Please do no not hijack this thread. If you wish to discuss your topic, please do start a thread on your own.

Thank you.
 
maggiemay2u said:
I think it’s the stuff that other threads are made of. It is not the subject of this thread. Please do no not hijack this thread. If you wish to discuss your topic, please do start a thread on your own.

Thank you.
Click to expand...
It’s related to this thread. It about priests making decisions on same-sex couples while paying less attention to priests involved in homosexuality.

We seem to be looking at the speck in our brother’s eye without paying attention to the log in our eyes.🤷 (or is this one also out of context?) Just curious
 
kelvinf said:
And he rebuked the apostles for sending away little children. He welcomed and blessed little children (with no strings attached).
Click to expand...
I love it when people uninformed about the historical context of Scripture use quotes anachronistically to draw inappropriate parallels to contemporary situations.

Right: And he rebuked the apostles for sending away little children born to one woman through fornication with a male or through reproductive technologies consisting of multiple embryos. Not addressing the clear fact that the women (both of them) were living in a sinful state, he welcomed and blessed such illicitly and artificially conceived children, and confirmed that it was the women, not the religious authoriities, who should be held up as an example of moral living.

Newsflash: Here are just three practices that were condemned by the Jews contemporaneous with Jesus, and with whom Jesus shared a moral code:
–polytheism
–homosexuality
–abortion

Any other questions?
 
kelvinf said:
It’s related to this thread. It about priests making decisions on same-sex couples while paying less attention to priests involved in homosexuality.
Click to expand...
Most likely the decisions being made by such priests are not the same priests “involved in homosexuality.”

Our confessor priests are also sinners, just like us, yet they have the authority to dispense judgment about our sins and the legitimacy to absolve those sins.
 
Personally, i think not letting a person do something because of a choice there parents made is unreasonable and unChristian. Admit the student and if anything against school rules happen then take normal discipline procedures.

The Child had no say whatsoever in what conditions it was brought up in, why deny that child an education in Christianity because of something that cant be helped?
 
kelvinf said:
It’s related to this thread. It about priests making decisions on same-sex couples while paying less attention to priests involved in homosexuality.

We seem to be looking at the speck in our brother’s eye without paying attention to the log in our eyes:shrug:
Click to expand...
God’s law, not that of mere men. All tenets of the faith are to be adhered with, violation by one group is not a valid argument for violating another.

By pointing out there are bad fireman who are arsonists does nothing to advance the argument that people who are quadriplegics should be accepted for placement as firemen.

There are a plethora of threads dealing with molestation among priests and others. If you feel I am incorrect in my assertion that bringing the evil of pedophile priests into the discussion is a red herring and an attempted hijacking of the thread, please contact a moderator. They are very nice people, if I am wrong, I will be told so in a most charitable manner.
 
HickmanJosh said:
Personally, i think not letting a person do something because of a choice there parents made is unreasonable and unChristian. Admit the student and if anything against school rules happen then take normal discipline procedures.

The Child had no say whatsoever in what conditions it was brought up in, why deny that child an education in Christianity because of something that cant be helped?
Click to expand...
Good question. Why indeed would loving parents subject a child to the absolute pain of hearing Church teaching and then having to see the sin played out in living color at home? How cruel to subject a child to the knowledge mom(s) are living openly in grave sin. Wouldn’t the loving thing to do be to live apart, and set an example of the faith? The couple has chosen this situation for the child, not the Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top