Homeschoolers forced into CCD for First Holy Eucharist

[NewEnglandPriest]

Thank you Father, but my quesiton was in reqards to what exactly is the “Spirit of the Law” in Canon 890. You had addressed that earlier. That the homeschoolers have the letter of the law on their side, but not the spriit.

Well since the canon states that parents and pastors have the charge of making sure those to receive the sacraments are properly disposed and come to it at appropriate times it would seem running roughshod over the parish program would be against the spirit of the canon. I think compromises can be reached in which HS’ers attend only certain elements of the parish program and such. But to say that a HS’er should completely avoid the parish program I think is a violation of the spirit of the canon.

So the letter of the law, in this case, was on the side of the bishop. But yet the CDWDS demonstrated how the SPIRIT of the Law should be enforced.

Yes and no. Particular laws of bishops’ conferences are always “secondary” (so to speak) to universal laws. The Vatican Congregations side with national conferences only on rare occasion.

When we discuss the ‘spirit’ of a law, we are looking at what the legislator intended, what are they trying to get at or do. That is the case with this responsium. It gets to the heart of legislation around the Sacraments. And it basically boiles down to this, “don’t let rules and regulations get in the way of giving the faithful the Grace of the Sacraments. The default should be to give the Sacrament, even if it gets in the way of rules”

I quite agree that we need not be caught up in pharisaic legalism. However, practical applications have to made that allow for the orderly and proper running of a parish community and diocese.

And again Father, since the CDWDS is the legislator of the Canons on the Sacraments, how can we do anything onther than obey. Is obedience only for circumstances that are convienient for us?

Like I said, there’s the technical word and the real world. The reality is that there’s very few bishops who will confirm someone outside of their diocesan norms without a compelling reason. And simply wanting the sacrament sooner rather than later isn’t going to cut it.
As for obedience, the Church rarely works in such black and white manners unless we’re dealing with heresy or threat of sanctions. A Bishop could simply press his case to a friendly face at the congregation and have a letter about such a situation given the run around or even press the congregation to reverse itself.

You seems to want to demand obedience from homeschoolers in your parish, but yet don’t seem to want to practice yourself? I find that to be both sad and troubling.

Yes life is sometimes funny that way. But I don’t think I’m asking for “obedience” as much as I’m asking for people to work together. Like I’ve said, when this issue is pushed far enough there’s not much I can do to stop someone from stomping their feet and not budging.
But life isn’t always about “obedience” and “rights”, its about coming together and working together for the spiritual betterment of ourselves and our brothers and sisters.

 

[Brendan]

Well since the canon states that parents and pastors have the charge of making sure those to receive the sacraments are properly disposed and come to it at appropriate times it would seem running roughshod over the parish program would be against the spirit of the canon.

Yes, you may check to see if they are properly disposed. That is clear, but we also have 793, which tells us that the parents may choose the means and the institutes.

Can. 793 §1 Parents, and those who take their place, have both the obligation and the right to educate their children. Catholic parents have also the duty and the right to choose those means and institutes which, in their local circumstances, can best promote the catholic education of their children

That is by no means a call to ‘run roughshod’, but it is clear that the parent may choose, or not choose, the parish program.

Yes and no. Particular laws of bishops’ conferences are always “secondary” (so to speak) to universal laws. The Vatican Congregations side with national conferences only on rare occasion.

Correct, all the rules and regulations set out by the diocese. But when a bishop is assigned to provide ‘regula’ to the diocese, does that mean that they are only charged with regulating particular law, or the universal law as well? As does the parish pastor, as the delagate, only have to guide using particular law?

I quite agree that we need not be caught up in pharisaic legalism. However, practical applications have to made that allow for the orderly and proper running of a parish community and diocese.

Correct, but that does not mean that we may violate Universal Law to do it, now does it.

Like I said, there’s the technical word and the real world. The reality is that there’s very few bishops who will confirm someone outside of their diocesan norms without a compelling reason. And simply wanting the sacrament sooner rather than later isn’t going to cut it.

Why not, why is it then better to deny someone who is entitled to Sacrament the Graces of that Sacrament. Why is it better to do that? Is that the purpose of the Church, either at the Universal, or Particular level?

As for obedience, the Church rarely works in such black and white manners unless we’re dealing with heresy or threat of sanctions.

I agree, the Church very seldom imposes disciplinary measures against such cases (unless, it seems, the Church the parish level

But are we still not called to provide such obedience? For example, we can look at Pastor Aeternus (Vatican I)

Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.

It doesn’t say that we are only to provide that obedience when there is the threat of sanction, or if it convienient to us, either personally, or to a level of Church community to do so.

Yes life is sometimes funny that way. But I don’t think I’m asking for “obedience” as much as I’m asking for people to work together. Like I’ve said, when this issue is pushed far enough there’s not much I can do to stop someone from stomping their feet and not budging.

Maybe work on not stomping your feet and not budging when a homeschooler brings their child to you for examination for a Sacrament. If obstinance is a fault to be corrected in others, does it behove the priest to demonstrate it himself.

But life isn’t always about “obedience” and “rights”, its about coming together and working together for the spiritual betterment of ourselves and our brothers and sisters.

Correct, and how defines that and at what level. You have already discarded the Universal community, in favor of the needs of the particular community. Why then criticize someone for disregarding the particular community in favor of the domestic community?

Heck, just a few paragraphs above, you were noting that desiring a Sacrament sooner that a particular regulation allows “isn’t going to cut it”, how is the denial of a Sacrament bettering the spiritual needs of that person?

Is not a Sacrament, by definition, the betterment of the spirituality of the person, and since we are a Church, the spirituality of all?

So it would seem very much that inviting any who are prepared, regardless of mean of preparation or specific age WOULD be to the spiritual benefit of the community.

So why, exactly, should the spiritual needs of the community take a backseat to the beaurcratic needs of the parish?

 

[Elizabeth502]

I don’t want to further inflame the conversation, or contribute to anyone’s hurt feelings. I just feel that I do need to mention, as someone who is quite well-acquainted with H-Schooling, has done it professionally (taught in H-S programs), and advocated for them, that not everyone who may disagree with some of the parental views here is a H-S basher, is prejudiced against them, or anything of the sort.

Some of us really do get it.

(1) Catholic parents have the right and responsibility to pass along their faith to their children;

(2) CCD programs in many --too many-- (but not all) parishes are frighteningly inadequate; this reality unfortunately extends also to many, many RCIA programs, which are often led by recent converts poorly grounded themselves in Catholic theology (in some cases poorly taught, in other cases rapidly hired after cursory education, because of personnel vacancies)

(3) H-Schooling is a wonderful and noble alternative, from cultural perspectives, minimum; it can also be wonderful (speaking as a professional here) if the parents know what they’re doing instructionally and have the energy/commitment to do it. Some homeschooling is as bad academically as some CCD programs are theologically. (Yours are probably all fine; no insinuation is intended.)

My parents never had a care in the world as to my religious instruction (and even though theirs was a mixed marriage; my father was Protestant). They saw to it that their 4 children, during times not enrolled in Catholic schools, attended twice/week catechism classes – once on a weekday afternoon, once Saturday a.m. They never had a care because the instruction was handled by nuns and priests. While the methodology was not always the best, the content was without controversy. They didn’t feel they had to “protect” their children from unknown content.

So I also understand the different position today’s Catholic parents sometimes find themselves in. But I still believe that the general messages imparted by NewEnglandPries and jmcrae are what should be the governing principles here. I have considerable formal training in Catholic theology, including graduate school. (And I “believe” in H-schooling!) Yet I would not want to take any chances with my children’s sacramental preparation, and I didn’t. I happened to know that their instruction in their Catholic school was traditional; and if it had not been, I would not have enrolled them in that school in the first place; if, as parishioners, they were public school or homeschool attendees, I would have checked out the quality of the CCD program in that parish, and removed ourselves from the parish if I questioned the propriety or completeness of that religious instruction.

Let me give you a similar example: I strongly disapprove of, for a variety of reasons, the recent trend in the last decade (maybe longer?) of waiting to confirm children until they’re practically adults. It has proven in all the cases I know of, to be disastrous. That is anecdotal only, I realize. Maybe it works where you live. But it has not worked where I live. It has become a meaningless exercise, both because of the advanced age of confirmation and because of the content of the programs, which are almost 100% parties and community service. Unbelievable. When I confronted one CCD person about this, she acknowledged that “confirmation is so late” (in adolescence) that the teenagers could only be persuaded to come if it was fun. (!)

My solution was not to home-school my children in the sacrament of confirmation. Recognizing that sacraments have a communal dimension to them (well articulated by the posters I named) I brought them to another parish, and at considerable inconvenience to them and to me.. A neighboring diocese (archdiocese, actually) had a traditional program, at the traditional age. My children were allowed to enroll in that program. Their experience was dramatically different from their peers who had to wait until age 16 or 17.

And the inconvenience of bringing them to that different diocese, many miles away, still pales in comparison with the inconvenient (labor-intensive) nature of homeschooling. So surely those who are willing to make the latter sacrifice (and creative enough to seek alternative solutions), could investigate similar creative solutions within the current structure of the Roman Catholic Church. IMHO that is preferable to an automatic us-vs-them assumption.

And if teaching and practices in one’s local parish are just so heretical or heterodox, it would seem that such a situation warrants reporting to higher authorities.

JMO. Please don’t bash me.

 

[bethndanny]

I am commenting on the fact that many a homeschool parent seems to be a serial nonconformist excluding themselves from everything because it’s not good enough for their child(ren). Even if you’re right, the overall effect is not positive.

This is the part of what you’re saying that really, really bothers me, and other home schoolers. You are making broad sweeping generalizations of us based on the some you know. This is not the case of any home schooler that I know. Like another poster mentioned, home schoolers participate in many parish functions. There is a home schooling family here that goes to daily mass together and the children are altar servers, daily. How amazing is that? I just do not understand at all why you really seem to believe that most home schoolers are simply caged in their homes, and not allowed to be in the “real world”. In reality what most home schoolers I know experience is a far more realistic version of the world. Through your life you are not put in nicely packaged bubbles with people that are your exact age, given minimal time to socialize and expected to sit quietly and pay attention for hours on end. Home schoolers are in the world. I wish that you could come here and meet the home schoolers that I know. I really do think that you’d change your view.

I really do agree with you about people claiming discrimination and in turn handicapping themselves. I do. I understand that to be true in many cases. I just do not feel that what you’re saying applies to this case. Home schoolers are not asking for special treatment, we’re asking the parish to follow what the CCC encourages.
As far as you disagreeing with the definition of discrimination, you’ll have to take that up with Webster’s. Webster’s said “prejudicial outlook”, I just bolded it for the post. You are in fact viewing home schoolers as a whole in a bad light. You are stereotyping them all in a negative fashion. It is a prejudicial outlook of all home schoolers based on minimal interaction with some.

 

[PaulinVA]

Beth, thank you for your response. I am trying to be polite, and at times have not been. Your responses are gracious, and I appreciate that.

I do not mean “serial nonconformist” in an entirely negative way, nor did I mean it in a hippie commune way. Your example of the family that serves at daily mass is a positive example of that. We, too, have a family like that and I admire them for that.

What I was referring to is the quality of looking at the broad landscape of life, and picking and choosing which things not to do and demanding those things that they decide to do. Examples are Homeschooling but demanding that a child be allowed to be in the local high school marching band or try out for a sport.

Now, once one decides to home school, which is an uphill battle in some places, the rest of the picking and choosing is easier. I’m not saying it’s wrong, per se. It just rubs some people the wrong way to hear “It is our right to do what we are asking.” from homeschoolers when a rethinking of ideas or reordering of a program is required.

As a boomer, yeah, it’s funny to hear me talk about being a conformist. But, my parents taught me one way to respect others was not to put other people out or make them go out of their way for something I want. So, in some ways, I envy homeschoolers who fight for everything to be the way they want, but in other ways I just want to tell them to be quiet and get in line with the rest of us.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Yes, you may check to see if they are properly disposed. That is clear, but we also have 793, which tells us that the parents may choose the means and the institutes.

So let’s just have a free for all. No parish prep at all. Just bring your child by any time and if someone is available they’ll give 'em a written exam. If they pass it we’ll immediately give them 1st Communion or anoint them with chrism.

That is by no means a call to ‘run roughshod’, but it is clear that the parent may choose, or not choose, the parish program.

Let’s all just do whatever I as an individual want to do and to heck with the rest of the parish.

Correct, but that does not mean that we may violate Universal Law to do it, now does it.

If I have a right to do it then I should do it whenever my whims dictate. I have a right to free speech so I will shout at the top of my lungs from every street corner.

Why not, why is it then better to deny someone who is entitled to Sacrament the Graces of that Sacrament. Why is it better to do that? Is that the purpose of the Church, either at the Universal, or Particular level?

Exactly, let’s have a free for all when it comes to sacraments. People can just show up and demand whatever they want whenever they want. If they’re refused they can just scream that they’re being denied their rights and constantly appeal and make noise until they get what they want.

But are we still not called to provide such obedience? For example, we can look at Pastor Aeternus (Vatican I)
It doesn’t say that we are only to provide that obedience when there is the threat of sanction, or if it convienient to us, either personally, or to a level of Church community to do so.

Once again, there’s the classroom and then there’s the real world.
Let’s just hope that when you appeal your bishop’s decision to Rome that your bishop isn’t good friends with someone in that Congregation. Otherwise your letter might get a “run around” response that doesn’t say much of anything and then your bishop won’t be disobedient to anything since the congregation didn’t say anything on your matter.

Maybe work on not stomping your feet and not budging when a homeschooler brings their child to you for examination for a Sacrament. If obstinance is a fault to be corrected in others, does it behove the priest to demonstrate it himself.

It never matters if the individual is liberal or conservative, if they don’t get exactly what they want in the exact manner that they want it, then there must be something wrong with the priest.

Correct, and how defines that and at what level. You have already discarded the Universal community, in favor of the needs of the particular community. Why then criticize someone for disregarding the particular community in favor of the domestic community?

LOL, well good luck finding a bishop anywhere that will start making exceptions to their diocesan norms simply because you want it sooner rather than later.

This is all wonderful nonsense to wax poetically about but when the rubber hits the road the parish and diocese can’t simply be a free for all of people demanding what they want when they want it. It doesn’t work that way, never has, and never will.

 

[jmcrae]

OK, I’ll bite.

a) Why should catechism and sacramental preparation certainly not be covered by the same teachers?

To avoid having people think that it’s the same subject matter, or the same material being covered. “Oh, yeah, I took Mrs. Smith’s class last year. I don’t need to take it again.”

b) What on earth kind of program could accidentally forget to get a baptismal certificate before giving additional sacraments to anyone?

You would be amazed what I used to run into when I was doing RCIA - there are lots of non-Catholics out there who took Sacramental Preparation, back when it was being done in the schools, by the same teachers who were doing the Religion programs, and they received First Holy Communion and First Reconciliation right along with their class, without anyone realizing that they weren’t supposed to be doing that.

They’d come to RCIA telling me something like, “I just found out that I’m not Catholic. I’ve been living as a Catholic since I was seven years old and received my First Holy Communion at St. Whozis Elementary School, but when we were going to get married and I went to track down my Baptismal certificate, I found out that my family was non-practicing Seventh Day Pentecostals of Nanak, and I’ve never been baptized.”

c) Are there really any programs small enough to take attendance but so large that the catechists can’t keep the Catholics and non-Catholics straight?

Not now that we do Sacramental Preparation in the parish, and Religion at the school, thus keeping the programs distinct from each other.

 

[bethndanny]

Beth, thank you for your response. I am trying to be polite, and at times have not been. Your responses are gracious, and I appreciate that.

I do not mean “serial nonconformist” in an entirely negative way, nor did I mean it in a hippie commune way. Your example of the family that serves at daily mass is a positive example of that. We, too, have a family like that and I admire them for that.

What I was referring to is the quality of looking at the broad landscape of life, and picking and choosing which things not to do and demanding those things that they decide to do. Examples are Homeschooling but demanding that a child be allowed to be in the local high school marching band or try out for a sport.

Now, once one decides to home school, which is an uphill battle in some places, the rest of the picking and choosing is easier. I’m not saying it’s wrong, per se. It just rubs some people the wrong way to hear “It is our right to do what we are asking.” from homeschoolers when a rethinking of ideas or reordering of a program is required.

As a boomer, yeah, it’s funny to hear me talk about being a conformist. But, my parents taught me one way to respect others was not to put other people out or make them go out of their way for something I want. So, in some ways, I envy homeschoolers who fight for everything to be the way they want, but in other ways I just want to tell them to be quiet and get in line with the rest of us.

Thank you for your thoughtful and kind words. I’ll be honest at the beginning of the discussion, with you in particular, I was a little, what is the right word?? I was less gracious than I should have been. It was as the dialogue continued that I saw some points of yours (the frustration with people playing the discrimination card) that I agree with and I took more time in my replies (as I should have from the start!) because I realized that you’re not actually intending to be as harsh in your posts as I may have been (inaccurately so I hope) reading them.
I did read your prior post as suggesting home schoolers were the hippie commune type. I was quite taken aback when I read it as such (I do now see that was not your intent). I am about as far from being a hippie as one can be.
The home schoolers wanting to participate in school sports is actually a great example of quite the opposite of what you’re concerned that home schoolers do. It is not (in most cases) that home schoolers do not want their children around other kids, including public/private schooled kids. They wante their kids involved, that is why they request to try out for sports, band, etc. It can simply be, as it is in my case, that my children will not receive the best education in a class room.
To get to your point about occasionally wanting to tell the home schoolers to get in line and be quiet… Obviously we’re on different sides of that fence. But, hopefully I can help you to see the whys behind it. I do think that some home schoolers (myself included in some circumstances) are automatically on the defense and it can seem a little over the top. But, if you step back and think of what each home schooler may have dealt with it may make more sense. You touched on it some when you mentioned the uphill battle. In some cases home schoolers have been harassed by the school system, child protective services, friends and family for their decision. I think of it similarly to the push we all must make to stop all things Christian from being removed from the public eye. We can all have our keep the Christ in Christmas car magnets on our cars as we push to gain our holiday back from the secular crowd. We can return any happy holidays greetings with a booming marry Christmas. Some may view this as intolerance, we view it as pushing back because we’ve been pushed aside. So sometimes home schoolers may push back in a more intense way than absolutely necessary, but I don’t think the intent is to be difficult.
Thank you for your continued dialogue with me. I have taken much of what you said to heart and I will do my best to not be intentionally obnoxious about my decision to home school my children.

 

[st_lucy]

What I was referring to is the quality of looking at the broad landscape of life, and picking and choosing which things not to do and demanding those things that they decide to do. Examples are Homeschooling but demanding that a child be allowed to be in the local high school marching band or try out for a sport.

Now, once one decides to home school, which is an uphill battle in some places, the rest of the picking and choosing is easier. I’m not saying it’s wrong, per se. It just rubs some people the wrong way to hear “It is our right to do what we are asking.” from homeschoolers when a rethinking of ideas or reordering of a program is required.

I just wanted to point out to you that as HSers we still pay the school taxes and just like all of the tax paying (and even the non-tax paying) populations, these are suppose to be things that our children are free to use. So I don’t understand why one would be upset if a HS family would want to go their local school district that they pay for and ask if their child could join the local marching band or try out for the football team, it is their right as a tax paying citizen. They are not asking for anything out of the ordinary, they are not asking for special treatment they are only asking for something that is theirs.and in fact taking a whole lot less then what is theirs.

 

[Brendan]

So let’s just have a free for all. No parish prep at all. Just bring your child by any time and if someone is available they’ll give 'em a written exam. If they pass it we’ll immediately give them 1st Communion or anoint them with chrism.

That is certainly an option, in fact I would even suggest that. The only obstacle is that, for some parents, teaching their own child is not an option, and their best choice WOULD be the parish.

If I have a right to do it then I should do it whenever my whims dictate. I have a right to free speech so I will shout at the top of my lungs from every street corner.

Father, perhaps you did not read Canon 793 completely. It is not only a right, but a DUTY for the parent to choose the best option for their child. If the best option is for the parent to instruct their child and then present the child for examination, anything less is a derilict of duty.

Exactly, let’s have a free for all when it comes to sacraments. People can just show up and demand whatever they want whenever they want.
If they’re refused they can just scream that they’re being denied their rights and constantly appeal and make noise until they get what they want.

If they meet the criteria set out by the Universal Church, what right does anyone have to refuse them. Are you adovocating the the priest or the DRE is being denied their ‘right’ to provide additional instruction?

Once again, there’s the classroom and then there’s the real world.
Let’s just hope that when you appeal your bishop’s decision to Rome that your bishop isn’t good friends with someone in that Congregation. …

Why bother with my own dubia, there is a wealth of them already on the subject

It never matters if the individual is liberal or conservative, if they don’t get exactly what they want in the exact manner that they want it, then there must be something wrong with the priest.

If the priest is ignoring what Rome is saying on the matter, then yes there would be something wrong with the priest.

This is all wonderful nonsense to wax poetically about but when the rubber hits the road the parish and diocese can’t simply be a free for all of people demanding what they want when they want it. It doesn’t work that way, never has, and never will.

It isn’t just a matter of ‘what they want’ but what they should expect from the Church under the governance of the Church.

The Sacraments do not belong to an individual priest, or even a bishop. They are entrusted to the Church as a whole and are to be dispensed according to the direction of the Church; NOT to the personal whims of anyone, clergy or lay, who chooses to add their own hoops to jump through.

In Moral Theology class, you, like I did, learned that ‘Justice’ is the virtue by which one renders to another his due.

If a person is due, under the law of the Church, (Canon 843) the Grace of a Sacrament, the withholding of that would be an act of Injustice.

You seem bent on deriding those who seek what they are due, that seek Justice. It is a sad state in parish when those who seek Justice are derided by it’s clergy.

This is far more than an simple excercise of rights when we are talking about admission to the Sacraments, it is Justice.

I feel many homeschooler reading your words will be reminded of the story of the persistant widow ( Luke 18:1-7) and note what they have to do.

 

[PaulinVA]

I just wanted to point out to you that as HSers we still pay the school taxes and just like all of the tax paying (and even the non-tax paying) populations, these are suppose to be things that our children are free to use. So I don’t understand why one would be upset if a HS family would want to go their local school district that they pay for and ask if their child could join the local marching band or try out for the football team, it is their right as a tax paying citizen. They are not asking for anything out of the ordinary, they are not asking for special treatment they are only asking for something that is theirs.and in fact taking a whole lot less then what is theirs.

Uhm, trying to be gracious here. Yes, you pay taxes. But, when your child tries out for marching band or a sports team and makes the team, he/she has taken a slot away from a child who actually goes to that school. As a Homeschooler, you have *rejected *that school, but have decided that it’s your right to use them to play sports or be in the band.

Once again, it’s your right. But it’s proves what I said.

 

[bethndanny]

Uhm, trying to be gracious here. Yes, you pay taxes. But, when your child tries out for marching band or a sports team and makes the team, he/she has taken a slot away from a child who actually goes to that school. As a Homeschooler, you have *rejected *that school, but have decided that it’s your right to use them to play sports or be in the band.

Once again, it’s your right. But it’s proves what I said.

Oh dear. I thought we were getting somewhere. See, home schoolers pay taxes, therefore our slot is established, whether we use it or not. We’re making for less crowded classrooms, which benefits the students attending school. You suggest that a home schooler ought to not use what they pay for? So if they want their children in band, sports, etc they should find private institutions that offer it and pay for it? Already the cost of home schooling can be a burden to some families. I reject the fact that my child will get a sub par education at our public school, I don’t reject the existence of the school. I don’t reject the extra curricular activities that are offered. I personally have never used the public school system for anything, but I simply do not understand your dislike of having home schoolers participate in some things. If we have our children in CCD are we not taking a slot from someone? Or perhaps requiring an extra teacher to be hired/or recruited as a volunteer? It does NOT take from other students. I mean if they attended the school they would be in the sport as well. What difference does it make that they do not attend math classes there too? Aside from the fact that now your child’s math class is a little smaller and the teacher can better do his or her job.

 

[PaulinVA]

To get to your point about occasionally wanting to tell the home schoolers to get in line and be quiet… Obviously we’re on different sides of that fence. But, hopefully I can help you to see the whys behind it. I do think that some home schoolers (myself included in some circumstances) are automatically on the defense and it can seem a little over the top. But, if you step back and think of what each home schooler may have dealt with it may make more sense. You touched on it some when you mentioned the uphill battle. In some cases home schoolers have been harassed by the school system, child protective services, friends and family for their decision. I think of it similarly to the push we all must make to stop all things Christian from being removed from the public eye. We can all have our keep the Christ in Christmas car magnets on our cars as we push to gain our holiday back from the secular crowd. We can return any happy holidays greetings with a booming marry Christmas. Some may view this as intolerance, we view it as pushing back because we’ve been pushed aside. So sometimes home schoolers may push back in a more intense way than absolutely necessary, but I don’t think the intent is to be difficult.
Thank you for your continued dialogue with me. I have taken much of what you said to heart and I will do my best to not be intentionally obnoxious about my decision to home school my children.

As I said, I’ve been mostly silent when Homeschooling threads are started here because they always end badly. As a public school parent, I feel like many here consider that I’ve made the worst education decision possible, and there is a defensiveness that develops from that. So, on these threads everyone is a little defensive, and sometimes things deteriorate.

Actually, my son is a freshman at a Catholic college he picked himself, so there must be something in the public school/CCD thing…

You’re right about homeschoolers facing disapproval from a lot of different sources. I don’t know what to say about that. I would hope that when we come together to worship we could be united. I’ve learned some interesting things on this thread. Not sure how to apply them to a parish. Seems the Bishops need to broaden their sacramental prep thinking a little.

 

[bethndanny]

As a public school parent, I feel like many here consider that I’ve made the worst education decision possible, and there is a defensiveness that develops from that. So, on these threads everyone is a little defensive, and sometimes things deteriorate.
.

So that you know, from a home schooler, I do NOT feel that public schools are all bad. I do think that there are some really good ones, I also think that some kids thrive in them, I also think that some families aren’t meant for home schooling, I also think that some kids would not do well being home schooled. So I do not judge you, or anyone else, for not home schooling. In real life, when I am around a public schooler and the topic of home schooling comes up I am careful to make it known that I respect their decision. I suppose things would go more smoothly here if I had done the same.

I’m happy to hear your son picked a Catholic college on his own. I pray my children will make the same choice.

 

[PaulinVA]

Oh dear. I thought we were getting somewhere. See, home schoolers pay taxes, therefore our slot is established, whether we use it or not.

Beth, I think this points out our differences. We can disagree. I just don’t understand why anyone who doesn’t go to a school should be allowed on the school team. It’s not the community team, it’s the team made up of students that go to that school.

As someone upthread said, they consider themselves the principal of a Church school. Well, that’s a different school than the public school that has a sports team.

I understand it’s your right. I understand it makes sense to you. I was using this as an example of picking and choosing things from all sources( like attending Religious Ed classes or sacramental prep retreats (had to add that to stay on topic ))

 

[jmcrae]

Oh dear. I thought we were getting somewhere. See, home schoolers pay taxes, therefore our slot is established, whether we use it or not. We’re making for less crowded classrooms, which benefits the students attending school. You suggest that a home schooler ought to not use what they pay for? So if they want their children in band, sports, etc they should find private institutions that offer it and pay for it? Already the cost of home schooling can be a burden to some families. I reject the fact that my child will get a sub par education at our public school, I don’t reject the existence of the school.

If you are homeschooling, your school taxes would go to whoever administers your home schooling federation, rather than to the public system, wouldn’t they? To cover the administrative costs of home-schooling.

Your public school board wouldn’t see any of your tax money, would they? Since the public board only receives a per-capita amount - the number of children registered in their system times whatever the per capita amount is. So no, you don’t “have a slot” - the only way you “have a slot” is if you are actually using it. The province doesn’t pay the school boards for slots that haven’t been filled.

 

[Brendan]

Uhm, trying to be gracious here. Yes, you pay taxes. But, when your child tries out for marching band or a sports team and makes the team, he/she has taken a slot away from a child who actually goes to that school. As a Homeschooler, you have *rejected *that school, but have decided that it’s your right to use them to play sports or be in the band.

Once again, it’s your right. But it’s proves what I said.

Question.

If the local law allows a homeschooler to try out for the team\band\whatever, is it not then actually a legal right for them to do so?

So it is then not actual the homeschool family DECIDING that it is a right, but simply recognizing what is a fact and acting upon that fact?

 

[EasterJoy]

To avoid having people think that it’s the same subject matter, or the same material being covered. “Oh, yeah, I took Mrs. Smith’s class last year. I don’t need to take it again.”

You would be amazed what I used to run into when I was doing RCIA - there are lots of non-Catholics out there who took Sacramental Preparation, back when it was being done in the schools, by the same teachers who were doing the Religion programs, and they received First Holy Communion and First Reconciliation right along with their class, without anyone realizing that they weren’t supposed to be doing that.

They’d come to RCIA telling me something like, “I just found out that I’m not Catholic. I’ve been living as a Catholic since I was seven years old and received my First Holy Communion at St. Whozis Elementary School, but when we were going to get married and I went to track down my Baptismal certificate, I found out that my family was non-practicing Seventh Day Pentecostals of Nanak, and I’ve never been baptized.”

Not now that we do Sacramental Preparation in the parish, and Religion at the school, thus keeping the programs distinct from each other.

I think our Sacramental prep is so clearly different than the knowledge end gained at the parish school and in RE that I couldn’t see how there could be confusion. It’s expected that by the time those Sacramental prep sessions are done as a group (parish school kids and RE kids together), that the knowledge end will have been mastered. The sacramental prep events are clearly different because that are a) whole-parish in the students they draw and b) not for students not involved in that sacrament. We have had a few kids who previously made their First Holy Communion in another country decide to participate, because their parishes hadn’t done anything similar, but it wouldn’t be open to kids who will not be receiving First Holy Communion.

It is in the RE and parish school, though, where the parents are first flagged down and required by the DRE (same for both) to have the baptismal certificates in for First Confession by X date. I think this is so that kids who haven’t been baptized can be correctly routed into RCIC. So there is that sort of overlap in between religious education and sacramental prep, for practical reasons.

I have no idea where home schoolers fit in all this in our parish; I would guess they actually are in the same boat as kids at out-of-parish parochial schools. But I don’t think parents with kids in public schools by day are offered a home schooling option.

Uhm, trying to be gracious here. Yes, you pay taxes. But, when your child tries out for marching band or a sports team and makes the team, he/she has taken a slot away from a child who actually goes to that school. As a Homeschooler, you have *rejected *that school, but have decided that it’s your right to use them to play sports or be in the band.

Once again, it’s your right. But it’s proves what I said.

I don’t think you’ve kept up with the reality of home schooling. For instance, it is not unusual for a child with significant learning issues or who is gifted or even who has a particular medical need to take some classes at home and some others at the neighborhood school. What the home schooling parent has essentially done is take a child who will be bored or overwhelmed or who has other needs that go beyond the time constraints of a teacher in an over-populated classroom and given more time to the full-time children. Looked at this way, the home schooler has taken nothing away from the school. They’ve actually contributed teacher time that would have gone to them back into the pool shared by the full-time kids.

Now, if a family comes swooping in for marching band or the sports team and does not feel any need to contribute volunteer time as a family that goes to that school, they’re just as bad as any other family that has kids in the school but that never volunteer. That is the biggest loss that is felt by home school and private school “rejection” of public schools.

When home schoolers “reject” a school, they do withdraw their volunteer time. If they “accept” part of the package, yes, they still owe the school parental involvement. But if that parental involvement in the school is there, I don’t see how it hurts that the home schooling families have reduced class sizes in the core curriculum classes. They aren’t taking anything away from the full-timers.

And here again…we have an artificial barrier that says, “You have to take the whole package, or none of it.” Well, OK, if there is a reason…but is there? If there isn’t, why put that barrier in? Very often (although not always) there isn’t a just reason to do it, and it isn’t handing anything to anybody that they’re getting for less than anyone else. People often define a school as belonging to the kids who go there for all their classes, but that is artificial, just like defining stairs that are just as much geared toward particular ability limitations as “normal” while ramps are thought of as “special accomodations.”

 

[EasterJoy]

If you are homeschooling, your school taxes would go to whoever administers your home schooling federation, rather than to the public system, wouldn’t they? To cover the administrative costs of home-schooling.

Your public school board wouldn’t see any of your tax money, would they? Since the public board only receives a per-capita amount - the number of children registered in their system times whatever the per capita amount is. So no, you don’t “have a slot” - the only way you “have a slot” is if you are actually using it. The province doesn’t pay the school boards for slots that haven’t been filled.

That depends on the system. Some systems are set up to account for part timers, or count home schools as de facto satellite campuses of the core neighborhood school. People have put their heads together and come up with some really creative solutions.

 

[jmcrae]

That depends on the system. Some systems are set up to account for part timers, or count home schools as de facto satellite campuses of the core neighborhood school. People have put their heads together and come up with some really creative solutions.

It’s probably different in different places. On my tax form, I can pick which school board to send my education taxes to; I am not required to support the public schools, if I don’t want to. (And in fact the Bishop prefers us to support the Catholic system.)