Homeschoolers forced into CCD for First Holy Eucharist

[CDNowak]

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.

Not in the US. In fact, private schools only receive a portion of the money per student that public schools receive. School boards receive the money raised in their district, minus any cooperation with private schools, divided among the schools based on the number of students.

 

[st_lucy]

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.

Not too mention that every ones property taxes goes directly to their local school district. State and Federal tax is a little different as in they go to the administration.

 

[jmcrae]

Not in the US. In fact, private schools only receive a portion of the money per student that public schools receive. School boards receive the money raised in their district, minus any cooperation with private schools, divided among the schools based on the number of students.

If the funding for the school is based on the number of students attending that school, then if your child is not attending that school, your child is also not being funded for a place in the band or on the football team - right?

 

[Brendan]

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 is a bit different here in Michigan. School boards get both a general fund allotment, and a per student allotment.

The general fund dollars generally come from local property taxes ( that are ‘equitized’ somewhat), the per student funding comes from 1/3 of the state sales tax revenue.

 

[CDNowak]

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Father, your sarcasm and manner hardly become the priesthood.

Just because someone is standing on their rights does not make them wrong. No one here wants to go to Rome, but when priests (or DRE’s, or bishops) show a lack of pastoral concern for their flock and go so far as open hostility… (and I feel very sorry for any homeschoolers in your parish).

Reality often falls short of what is right and just. That is true, but is no excuse to perpetuate a situation that is unjust. Are not all those who represent the Church called to be “all things to all men”? Or are they supposed to “tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders”, while “they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger”?

Do you not see the blind arrogance of your own position? You acknowledge that the local laws that trouble homeschoolers contravene universal law, and that universal law takes precedence. You recognize that your argument is essentially untenable. But yet you are unwilling to act in good faith, because in reality the bishop will back you up, and the person will have to appeal to Rome? Do you realize this only cements the legalism that you deride? How are the faithful supposed to react when then clergy lord their position over the laity and force them to their only defense: the law?

 

[CDNowak]

If the funding for the school is based on the number of students attending that school, then if your child is not attending that school, your child is also not being funded for a place in the band or on the football team - right?

Divided amongst the schools in the district. The district would receive the same amount of money if there were no homeschoolers or private schools, lowering the per pupil rate. Given the case law in the US, the right has been established in some states for any student to be able to participate in the programs.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Father, your sarcasm and manner hardly become the priesthood.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Just because someone is standing on their rights does not make them wrong. No one here wants to go to Rome, but when priests (or DRE’s, or bishops) show a lack of pastoral concern for their flock and go so far as open hostility… (and I feel very sorry for any homeschoolers in your parish).

This is why I’m being sarcastic. Neither you nor Brendan are apparently seeing anything but what you want to see. I’m talking about compromise and coming together to find a common ground solution. You and Brendan are saying that HS’ers are somehow being attacked and don’t have to do anything since its their right to simply do as they want.
My sarcasm is to make a point. There’s general rules and norms for a reason. They’re not made up because we have nothing better to do and enjoy making people jump through hoops. For compelling reasons exceptions are occasionally made and compromises agreed to. But simply saying, “its my right so I want it” results in chaos since anyone could technically claim that in any situation. As I said, is having 1st communion only once a year a violation of a child’s right to receive the sacrament when he/she is ready? Should we be having 1st communion available every Sunday or why not every day? After all its their right to receive the sacrament when they’re ready and not have to wait for the parish schedule.
What about baptisms? Do we really need to wait for the once a month baptism? Why can’t every family just show up when they want on any day to receive this most essential sacrament?

To you its sarcasm, to me its the same argument that Brendan is making regarding receiving confirmation earlier than the norm is for the diocese.

Reality often falls short of what is right and just. That is true, but is no excuse to perpetuate a situation that is unjust. Are not all those who represent the Church called to be “all things to all men”? Or are they supposed to “tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders”, while “they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger”?

Asking children to partake in some way, shape, or form in a parish sacramental preparation program is hardly “tying up heavy burdens” and is not an unjust and horrible expectation.

Do you not see the blind arrogance of your own position? You acknowledge that the local laws that trouble homeschoolers contravene universal law, and that universal law takes precedence. You recognize that your argument is essentially untenable. But yet you are unwilling to act in good faith, because in reality the bishop will back you up, and the person will have to appeal to Rome? Do you realize this only cements the legalism that you deride? How are the faithful supposed to react when then clergy lord their position over the laity and force them to their only defense: the law?

Oh please, the drama here is too much. There’s two distinct situations being talking about there. One is in regards to HS’ers and the other is in regards to receive a sacrament early. Don’t combine the two as one issue.
As for HS’ers there’s always some kind of compromise and common ground solution that can be reached by people of good will that will benefit both the HS’ers and the parish as a whole.
As for those who wish to receive confirmation early for no other reason that than they want to, sorry, but no one outside of someone sitting in a tiny un-airconditioned office in Rome who hasn’t stepped foot in a parish in 30 years is going to think that’s a good idea.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

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.

LOL, if you went that route then you’d be swiftly replaced as pastor by the Bishop.

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.

And I fail to see how some kind of participation in a parish program would be harmful to a child unless the child had some kind of psychological problems.

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?

The parish is being denied its normal operating procedure for lack of a compelling reason.

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

You’re going to need your own because no Bishop is going to pay attention to past cases.

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

No priest wants to be known as the parish that people can flock to in order to avoid CCD. That’s going to cause problems with other parishes and even the bishop’s office.

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.

And the bishops and priests are doing their best to make for orderly and timely reception of the sacraments by all Catholics.

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.

Like I said, then let’s follow this to its logical conclusion: any sacrament at any time for any reason.

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.

Ah, the drama of this issue is quite the scene to witness. Like I said, many of your points are great classroom banter but in reality it doesn’t work that way.

 

[Brendan]

LOL, if you went that route then you’d be swiftly replaced as pastor by the Bishop.

Really? The bishop has that many extra priests that he can afford to replace all those who actually follow Church law

And I fail to see how some kind of participation in a parish program would be harmful to a child unless the child had some kind of psychological problems.

I never said ‘harmful’ and neither did Church Law, only that the parent may choose what is BEST for the child. From one choice being the ‘best’ it does not logically follow that the other choices are ‘harmful’ and I surprised that you would come to that conclusion? Didn’t they teach logic in the seminary as well?

The parish is being denied its normal operating procedure for lack of a compelling reason.

To begin with, the ‘compelling reason’ is at the decision of the parent, remember Canon 793?. And now you too complaining about ‘rights’ being denied. If the parish is allowed to complain

You’re going to need your own because no Bishop is going to pay attention to past cases.

Actually, I know that to be quite untrue. In my own diocese, the rector of the Cathedral was in the practice of emptying the Holy Water fonts during the season of Lent. This was also customary in several parishes as well. A layman I know presented Cardinal Maida with a copy of a dubium on that subject that showed that the practice was contrary to the Church’s understanding of the purpose of sacramentals and a correct understanding of the season of Lent.

Cardinal Maida not only ordered the Holy water fonts filled, but sent out a letter to the each parish forbidding the practice.

The layman had no need to send a new letter to Rome, rather all his had to do was count on the Justice of a true Shepherd of Christ.

No priest wants to be known as the parish that people can flock to in order to avoid CCD. That’s going to cause problems with other parishes and even the bishop’s office.

That’s a pretty broad generalization, is it not?, and I suppose it would only be true in a diocese where the bishop does not place any true emphasis on their diocese being part of the Universal Church. I am beginning to get a deeper understading of the environment in which you serve, and I’m not all that impressed.

And the bishops and priests are doing their best to make for orderly and timely reception of the sacraments by all Catholics.’/quote]

Good, because ‘timely’ involves when the person is ready to recieve the Sacrament, not when the DRE is ready to process the paperwork.

Like I said, then let’s follow this to its logical conclusion: any sacrament at any time for any reason.

Under what circumstances do you deny a person who presents himself to you for Communion at Church? Of course there are reasons to do so, but they are limited. Likewise there are reasons to deny a child access to the Sacraments, but they too are limited and clearly outlined in Church law.

Now having ‘limited’ reasons for denying them is not the same thing as "any reason, any time’ is it?

Ah, the drama of this issue is quite the scene to witness. Like I said, many of your points are great classroom banter but in reality it doesn’t work that way.

Why not, again, I see it personally happening in my parish. So to claim that it ‘doesn’t work that way’ is, again, proveable wrong. All you can logically claim is that you personally cannot think of a way to make it work (it’s that ‘logic’ thing again)

I’d be glad to PM you my pastor’s contact information, perhaps he can give you some tips.

He’s great. If we have a request or spiritual need, he does not attempt to hide behind a beaucratic mindset. If you have the documenation to make your case, he will listen, regardless of if it is convienient for him to act on your case or not.

And if what you are asking is in line with Church teaching, he will do his very best to give it. Kinda like Christ.

 

[CDNowak]

Thanks for your thoughts.

snip<

Father, where is the compromise from your side, besides jmcrae’s program, which I have acknowledged as such? If HS’ers are received with hostility, as they have been more than once here, they go for their strongest defense, the law. No-one has presented a counter argument to the right argument, except the ad hominem of selfishness and the “just let them try it” approach (from a poster who claims to be a priest, no less).

So HS’ers are driven into a corner, because no compromise is offered or acceptable in many parishes. We are expected to obey blindly, when the Church says we are not in disobedience. This is a serious and legitimate concern, and the dignity of the persons involved call for an end to the mocking tone.

Several of us, including both Brendan and myself, have proposed compromises and demonstrated a certain degree of workability. You cite chaos that does not exist and that you have not demonstrated exists.

Several of us, including myself, have demonstrated that there is a right in canon law for parents to educated their children. We have demonstrated that the CDW interprets the matter of requirements for the sacraments in favor of the reception of the Sacrament (which of course it is bound to do by canon law itself). You insist on setting aside universal law and rights to preserve the local law, despite its contradiction. Not in the name of the good, but of a vague sense of “order”.

Yes, we do want to follow Canon law to its logical conclusion. If a priest is actually open to that, we are more than willing to step in and help. It is wrong that the “way it is” contradicts canon law, but that is hardly the HS’ers doing.

Your “argument”, father, has been to try to shout down those that raise logical argument. That destroys any confidence in you and, by extension the bishop, and drives the wedge in deeper. The HS’ers can try to pull it out, but the hammer of clericalism is heavy. So many don’t try. Those of us here are trying, but how long can we keep pleading for reason in the face of such an arrogant attitude?

I think another poster’s suggestion is correct: in the face of this sort of willful denial of canon law, the only choice homeschoolers have is to appeal to Rome, en masse.

Antonio Cardinal Cañizares Llovera, Prefect
Archbishop Joseph Augustine Di Noia, O.P., Secretary
Palazzo delle Congregazioni, 00193 Roma, Piazza Pio XII, 10

 

[Brendan]

Thanks for your thoughts.

This is why I’m being sarcastic. Neither you nor Brendan are apparently seeing anything but what you want to see. I’m talking about compromise and coming together to find a common ground solution. … For compelling reasons exceptions are occasionally made and compromises agreed to.

Compromising is good. But ‘compelling reasons’ is rather subjective, are the reasons available for compromising as well, or is it a "my way or the highway’?

But simply saying, “its my right so I want it” results in chaos since anyone could technically claim that in any situation. As I said, is having 1st communion only once a year a violation of a child’s right to receive the sacrament when he/she is ready?

…
Should we be having 1st communion available every Sunday or why not every day? After all its their right to receive the sacrament when they’re ready and not have to wait for the parish schedule.

As a big event, no. But what is exactly wrong about a First Communicant coming up with his family on a typical Sunday if that is what works for them? It’s really no skin off your teeth, so to speak, as you are saying Mass anyway. So what ‘extra’ is involved.

What about baptisms? Do we really need to wait for the once a month baptism? Why can’t every family just show up when they want on any day to receive this most essential sacrament?

That is slightly different, as Masses and Confessions are regularly scheduled. I would see no issue with a child recieving their First Holy Communion at any Mass, or having their First Confession heard at any regularly secheduled times. Likewise, if a child is ready for Confirmation, having one more child in line for the bishop is not really any extra effort on anyone’s part.

To you its sarcasm, to me its the same argument that Brendan is making regarding receiving confirmation earlier than the norm is for the diocese.

In other words, it something that the Church allows, but not what

Asking children to partake in some way, shape, or form in a parish sacramental preparation program is hardly “tying up heavy burdens” and is not an unjust and horrible expectation.

And once again, the ‘asking’ isn’t the problem, I have never expressed any arguments against that. It is the demanding that is the issue. So which are we talking about here?

And FYI, I brought up the Confirmation early thing to demonstrate how we, as a Church, should view the spirit of the law on Sacramentology. Since you were the one who first brought up the ‘letter vs spirit’ argument, it deserved a response.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Really? The bishop has that many extra priests that he can afford to replace all those who actually follow Church law

Its not as if the priest is kicked out of priesthood, just moved to another assignment like hospital duty or something like that. Or perhaps a parish way out of the way so that word doesn’t get around that people can just show up out of the blue and demand a sacrament.

I never said ‘harmful’ and neither did Church Law, only that the parent may choose what is BEST for the child. From one choice being the ‘best’ it does not logically follow that the other choices are ‘harmful’ and I surprised that you would come to that conclusion? Didn’t they teach logic in the seminary as well?

LOL, you’d think it was harmful the way you’re recoiling in horror that a child may have to go to a handful of parish education classes.

Actually, I know that to be quite untrue. In my own diocese, the rector of the Cathedral was in the practice of emptying the Holy Water fonts during the season of Lent. This was also customary in several parishes as well. A layman I know presented Cardinal Maida with a copy of a dubium on that subject that showed that the practice was contrary to the Church’s understanding of the purpose of sacramentals and a correct understanding of the season of Lent.
Cardinal Maida not only ordered the Holy water fonts filled, but sent out a letter to the each parish forbidding the practice.

Wow, not even the same ballpark my friend.

That’s a pretty broad generalization, is it not?, and I suppose it would only be true in a diocese where the bishop does not place any true emphasis on their diocese being part of the Universal Church. I am beginning to get a deeper understading of the environment in which you serve, and I’m not all that impressed.

There’s very few bishops (in this country at the very least) that are going to say ok to someone demanding to be confirmed at a younger age for no reason other than they want to.

Good, because ‘timely’ involves when the person is ready to recieve the Sacrament, not when the DRE is ready to process the paperwork.

So every sacrament should now take place within 24 hours of it being requested?

Under what circumstances do you deny a person who presents himself to you for Communion at Church? Of course there are reasons to do so, but they are limited. Likewise there are reasons to deny a child access to the Sacraments, but they too are limited and clearly outlined in Church law.

Are you serious? Show up with your child and his/her baptismal certificate on a Tuesday morning and demand he/she receive first communion at that morning mass. Let’s see how far you get at any parish.

Why not, again, I see it personally happening in my parish. So to claim that it ‘doesn’t work that way’ is, again, proveable wrong. All you can logically claim is that you personally cannot think of a way to make it work (it’s that ‘logic’ thing again)

So you’re saying that your parish confirms anyone who asks for it regardless of age? I highly doubt that.

 

[EasterJoy]

LOL, if you went that route then you’d be swiftly replaced as pastor by the Bishop.

And I fail to see how some kind of participation in a parish program would be harmful to a child unless the child had some kind of psychological problems.

The parish is being denied its normal operating procedure for lack of a compelling reason.

You’re going to need your own because no Bishop is going to pay attention to past cases.

No priest wants to be known as the parish that people can flock to in order to avoid CCD. That’s going to cause problems with other parishes and even the bishop’s office.

And the bishops and priests are doing their best to make for orderly and timely reception of the sacraments by all Catholics.

Like I said, then let’s follow this to its logical conclusion: any sacrament at any time for any reason.

Ah, the drama of this issue is quite the scene to witness. Like I said, many of your points are great classroom banter but in reality it doesn’t work that way.

But we’re getting off-thread…the OP is certainly not talking about finding the parish where her kids don’t have to get CCD! My understanding is that she is saying that in her home school she already teaches CCD from a formal curriculum. She is pointing out that it is an unnecessary duplication of education to require RE for kids in a program like hers. The request is to be treated in the same way as other in-parish students who are attending accredited out-of-parish Catholic schools, instead of being treated as if the home school students are in a public school where religion cannot legally be taught. It is a fully reasonable request.

Now, for the parish to tell anybody, home school or not, that there are sacramental preparatory events that every candidate for a particular sacrament has to attend, even the prodigies ready to write up their PhD dissertations in theology, that is one matter. Those events or short series usually take up far less time, maybe 4-6 hours, over 2 to 4 sessions. That is another thing. That is reasonable. Most sacraments have similar preparation requirements, including marriage and baptism. No canon law gives relief from that.

The problem comes when a certain amount of parochial school or RE hours, whether finished or being completed concurrently, is required before the child can participate in the parish sacramental preparation AND the home schoolers using an accredited Catholic curriculum are not counted as a Catholic school.

I know there are home schoolers who don’t want anybody else to have their child’s ear or eye for any reason. This is not that. This is objecting to having 25-30 hours or more of classes, spread out over 20 or more weeks, as a prerequisite for entrance into parish sacramental preparation, which I think we can agree doesn’t take anything like that much class time.

Why make home schoolers exempt from RE and kids in public schools not exempt? Because home schoolers have demonstrated that they can teach real academic subjects and satisfy requirements to the satisfaction of an outside educational entity overseeing them, and can do it during school hours, just as parochial schools do. They are a real school. They deserve to be treated like what they are.

As for the rest, any of the ones who just want to evade effort or the foxhole home schoolers who fight every contact their kids have with parish staff, who are collectively trying to get out of reasonable sacramental preparation, that’s another thread. I’m thinking I’ll be squarely on your side for that one!

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Father, where is the compromise from your side, besides jmcrae’s program, which I have acknowledged as such? If HS’ers are received with hostility, as they have been more than once here, they go for their strongest defense, the law. No-one has presented a counter argument to the right argument, except the ad hominem of selfishness and the “just let them try it” approach (from a poster who claims to be a priest, no less).

Once again, posters apparently only see what they want to see. I have stated several times that compromises and common ground solutions are the best option. I even explicitly stated that HS’ers perhaps need attend only a handful of parish preparation/education events.

I compared people who refuse all attempts at compromise to those who stomp their feet and yell.

The “just let them try it” argument was in regards to demanding the sacrament of confirmation early for no reason other than wanting it earlier.

So HS’ers are driven into a corner, because no compromise is offered or acceptable in many parishes. We are expected to obey blindly, when the Church says we are not in disobedience. This is a serious and legitimate concern, and the dignity of the persons involved call for an end to the mocking tone.

Obviously any lack of compromise by a parish on this issue would be uncharitable and in some situations unjust.
But there’s also a mocking tone here towards those responsible for trying to run parishes and diocese in an orderly manner.

Several of us, including both Brendan and myself, have proposed compromises and demonstrated a certain degree of workability. You cite chaos that does not exist and that you have not demonstrated exists.

The chaos doesn’t exist for a very important reason: no one thinks they can just show up and demand confirmation or any other sacrament. However if we set that ball in motion over time chaos will reign.

Several of us, including myself, have demonstrated that there is a right in canon law for parents to educated their children.

No one is denying a parent’s right to educate their child. What’s in dispute are apparently 2 issues:

1. extent of expected participation in parish preparation/education programs
2. when someone can receive sacraments

Not in the name of the good, but of a vague sense of “order”.

Order is, to some degree, a good.

Yes, we do want to follow Canon law to its logical conclusion. If a priest is actually open to that, we are more than willing to step in and help. It is wrong that the “way it is” contradicts canon law, but that is hardly the HS’ers doing.

And its not my doing that if I have 2 people request early confirmation and I approve one but not the other that my behind is going to be hauled into the bishop’s office for a talk about how I’ve created a chaotic situation in my parish.

Your “argument”, father, has been to try to shout down those that raise logical argument. That destroys any confidence in you and, by extension the bishop, and drives the wedge in deeper. The HS’ers can try to pull it out, but the hammer of clericalism is heavy. So many don’t try. Those of us here are trying, but how long can we keep pleading for reason in the face of such an arrogant attitude?

{sigh} This isn’t about clericalism.

I think another poster’s suggestion is correct: in the face of this sort of willful denial of canon law, the only choice homeschoolers have is to appeal to Rome, en masse.

Why not just try to reach a compromise/common ground with your local pastor or bishop?

 

[Brendan]

Its not as if the priest is kicked out of priesthood, just moved to another assignment like hospital duty or something like that. Or perhaps a parish way out of the way so that word doesn’t get around that people can just show up out of the blue and demand a sacrament.

No, you have to interview them first, we’ve discussed that already.

LOL, you’d think it was harmful the way you’re recoiling in horror that a child may have to go to a handful of parish education classes.

Could you quote exactly where I ‘recoiled in horror’.

Wow, not even the same ballpark my friend.

Well you were the one who said that a bishop would not listen to an old responsorium. Did you not?

There’s very few bishops (in this country at the very least) that are going to say ok to someone demanding to be confirmed at a younger age for no reason other than they want to.

No, a good number, when seeing the responsorium, would probably ask the pastor if the child was prepared. If the pastor answered responded with an honest assesment in the affirmative, the bishop would simply say ‘sure…fine…whatever’. That number probably comes to over half. And most of them would even wonder why the priest bothered in the first place and didn’t just place them in the line with everyone else.

There are also a few who would if it looked like a big stink would be raised There is no doubt that they would try and get out of it, but most don’t like to be placed in situations where they are seen as knowingly and publically contradictoring a Vatican directive. It tends to rock the boat, so to speak, and the might not get what they want when they need to go to Rome for something.

A responsorium signed by an undersecretary, maybe, not one by the Cardinal himself.

If it looks like it might go public, they will do the Confirmation. If not, they won’t.

And, of course, there are a few, probably less than a third, who would simply say 'no way, I don’t care what Rome says"

The first are heartening, the last two, kinda sad.

So every sacrament should now take place within 24 hours of it being requested?

Why don’t we just compromise on the next scheduled celebration of that Sacrament

Are you serious? Show up with your child and his/her baptismal certificate on a Tuesday morning and demand he/she receive first communion at that morning mass. Let’s see how far you get at any parish.

Now are we talking about someone you have never met here? Or a homeschooling family that has had their kids in the parish for years. Which instance are we discussing.

So you’re saying that your parish confirms anyone who asks for it regardless of age? I highly doubt that.

What I am saying is that my pastor regularly deals with homeschoolers and if they have a spiritual need that is in line with the Church, he will do his best to grant it. If it appears to go against norms, he will want some documentation ( a dubium will certainly suffice).

I do know of 1st graders who were brought in for Communion, and 2nd graders who were pushed back. I don’t personally know if there was someone who talked to him about Confirmation, but I imagine it would work the same if asked.

As I mentioned in a earlier post, our Deacon interviews everyone, CCD or not, who is coming in for a Sacrament. If an 6th grader came in, the Deacon would give them the same interview and if they passed, and the pastor knew of regularl Church attendance, he would bring it to the attention of the bishop. I have little doubt that Cardinal Maida was in the first group I mentioned: he was always big on following what the CDWDS had to say after all, they were his brother Cardinals and he worked with them. Archbishop Vigeron, I don’t know, but I’m likewise presuming the first group, as he was a Cardinal Maida protege.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Compromising is good. But ‘compelling reasons’ is rather subjective, are the reasons available for compromising as well, or is it a "my way or the highway’?

I’ve never said “my way or the highway.” I’ve consistently said compromise should be reached rather than simply insisting, “I don’t have to send my kid to anything and I won’t.”

As a big event, no. But what is exactly wrong about a First Communicant coming up with his family on a typical Sunday if that is what works for them? It’s really no skin off your teeth, so to speak, as you are saying Mass anyway. So what ‘extra’ is involved.

Thanks for proving my point. Essentially you’re advocating a free for all situation. And yes there is extra since how do I know the child has been prepared? When we have a regularly scheduled first communion its verified that the children have all participated in the proper preparation and have been baptized. Its done en masse. Now you’re asking that every couple of weeks we need to verify an individual child’s education/preparation, baptism, and availability.

Likewise, if a child is ready for Confirmation, having one more child in line for the bishop is not really any extra effort on anyone’s part.

For starters, why should someone who wants the sacrament of confirmation have to wait an entire year? If its their right to receive it who is the bishop to make them wait an entire year?
Secondly, its not about the day of confirmation. Its about the mess of the fact if everyone wanted to receive confirmation at any year they wanted, it’d be a mess to weed through who was ready ahead of time and who should wait for the normative year. It would cause division and a mess of appeals and anger.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

But we’re getting off-thread…the OP is certainly not talking about finding the parish where her kids don’t have to get CCD! My understanding is that she is saying that in her home school she already teaches CCD from a formal curriculum. She is pointing out that it is an unnecessary duplication of education to require RE for kids in a program like hers. The request is to be treated in the same way as other in-parish students who are attending accredited out-of-parish Catholic schools, instead of being treated as if the home school students are in a public school where religion cannot legally be taught. It is a fully reasonable request.

Indeed it is a reasonable request given your next statement:

Now, for the parish to tell anybody, home school or not, that there are sacramental preparatory events that every candidate for a particular sacrament has to attend, even the prodigies ready to write up their PhD dissertations in theology, that is one matter. Those events or short series usually take up far less time, maybe 4-6 hours, over 2 to 4 sessions. That is another thing. That is reasonable.

Why make home schoolers exempt from RE and kids in public schools not exempt? Because home schoolers have demonstrated that they can teach real academic subjects and satisfy requirements to the satisfaction of an outside educational entity overseeing them, and can do it during school hours, just as parochial schools do. They are a real school. They deserve to be treated like what they are.

However, as other posters here have pointed out, even if they are in public school, technically speaking, canon law does not require them to attend CCD.

As for the rest, any of the ones who just want to evade effort or the foxhole home schoolers who fight every contact their kids have with parish staff, who are collectively trying to get out of reasonable sacramental preparation, that’s another thread. I’m thinking I’ll be squarely on your side for that one!

As you said, all the issues are getting interwoven. There’s clearly some distinct situations that have differing “solutions” and unfortunately we’re constantly combining them for convenience of debate.

 

[CDNowak]

Once again, posters apparently only see what they want to see. I have stated several times that compromises and common ground solutions are the best option. I even explicitly stated that HS’ers perhaps need attend only a handful of parish preparation/education events.

snip<

OK, just went back over your posts in this thread, father.

You started (1st substantial post, page 14)
saying:

Parish priests of large and small parishes do not want to get into the “make an exception for me” syndrome. It starts with one legitimate family’s request and spins out of control into an unmanageable mess.

and stated that you would deny a legitimate request so that you didn’t get more of them.

You have argued consistently that priests should ignore canon law, and the clarifications of it. You have also suggested compromise, vaguely.

You’ll have to forgive me if I can’t take you at your word on actually meaning compromise, however, because that would set a precedent and make your life harder, because that has been your consistent argument. That rights to the Sacraments (whether prepared by the parent, or ready for the Sacrament of Confirmation earlier than the diocesan, but not universal, norm) are limited by the convenience of the priest and staff. This is where I see the clericalism: inconvenience the parents, the children, just not the priest or bishop.

The ‘mocking’ tone is purely anger at the injustice you openly advocate. The denial of canonical rights and duties, on the basis of “it’s too hard” to work out. The denial of rights because someone is willing to claim them, and thus must be a discontent.

Both cases in question are about one issue, what is proper preparation for the Sacraments? Canon law gives a definition, a rather low bar compared to diocesan and parish requirements. However, that is the standard for preparation, anything added to that, while the bishop may request it, is extra.

Establishing a standard in conformity with canon law may involve a time of chaos, but it would not last long. Most people would rather have their children in CCD (where they can slip through without actually learning their faith) then teach them themselves and have them get denied if they don’t know their faith. The parish (or more likely the diocese, since they already have lists) can approve materials for homeschooling, and request that any materials be submitted first.

A comparison might be drawn between the good of the Sacraments and this sort of order, the need for food versus the desire for a comfortable bed, perhaps? But then again perhaps we are arguing about two kinds of order, one based on a higher law and one on a lesser law: like speeding to save a life?

If my pastor or bishop were anything like you (I know the local pastors are not, thankfully), then the only option would be to appeal to Rome (or change ritual Churches, or find a traditional parish, or perhaps an Anglican Use, if one is so fortunate, although those would have to go to Rome as well). No father, the best way to face a bully is head on.

BTW, in case you haven’t noticed I don’t exactly have a “dog in this fight”, so to speak. My interest comes a formerly HS’ed student, a student of Church discipline, and as a Catholic (oh yeah, and a fan of the right for righteousness’ sake).

 

[Learning123]

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Again, I haven’t read all the way through the thread yet. I can’t speak for all home school families, only for our own. So as the original poster …
This is not a whim. I have not even raised my voice. I’ve tried to be very careful not to make this an issue of local gossip–having only talked to 2 other people locally out of bewilderment, wanting to find out if I had misunderstood the previous standard and seeking their counsel (this being our oldest child and they having had several already having reached this age.
It was after much research, discussion, and prayer that we decided to home school with a Catholic accredited program. Have I read everything available in the Catholic Church? No. Do I have a theology or such degree? No. But from what I had read and had seen as the previous standard at our parish, I was expecting that we should adequately prepare our children for the sacraments–through study, prayer, and participation in the parish–and the priest would have a chat with the child to determine that the child was in fact ready. I wasn’t expecting the new priest’s response. When he explained he had promised obedience expressly relating to religious education of those in the years receiving First Penance, First Holy Eucharist, and Confirmation I understood why he would not make an exception–this was not yet explained at the time of my original post. I have no fault with him for this. I haven’t demanded anything. I have spent time learning from this thread, reading CCC, Canon Law, and various encyclicals, discussing with my spouse, and in prayer trying to decide what if anything we should do. If our program was like jmcrae I don’t think I’d have anything about which to be unsettled. Perhaps in that situation it is even the priest himself leading or otherwise involved in the sessions. If a compromise, as I think you suggested in a prior post, was an option I don’t think I’d have anything about which to be unsettled. But as the priest has promised obedience with no exceptions he hasn’t left the door cracked for a compromise. From looking at the scope, sequence, and outline for the program they use, it does look like the main prep for First Holy Eucharist is about 4 weeks, but we are being asked to attend at least 12 weeks (I’m not sure of the end date).

JMO, but it seems so strange to delay sacraments beyond the child’s readiness. In the case of Confirmation I could understand that it might only be available once a year. As others have said, there are graces imparted. So I echo them, why withhold the graces from our children? My original post was about First Holy Eucharist, but in regards to First Penance, once a child is ready it seems torturous to make them wait. They know they have sin on their soul, and they want it gone! I was not confirmed until my sophomore or junior year. Our choices are our choices, but I can’t help but wonder what difference some additional graces might have made for me and the majority of my peers.

I remember proximate preparation having been mentioned. I remember one of the adult study programs in which I participated at least touching on the topic. I do intend to reread that information before making further communication with our diocese or parish. If there is reading you suggest on the topic please feel free to share, by PM as well would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Learning123]

Following this line of thought…

…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…

Does choosing the parish school mean you’re no longer involved in the larger community? No. Does choosing to do Catholic education at home mean your’e no longer involved in the parish? No. Yet no matter how involved a family is with the parish otherwise, they’re going to be branded as separating themselves from the parish over their choice of sacramental preparation? As EasterJoy said, why must it be all or none? Do I consider any who participate in the parish school or CCD as separating themselves from the parish because they choose not to come to parish rosaries, not to join Ladies Sodality, etc., etc.? No.